NCAA is sitting a dangerous president with decision

[PorkSoda]

the argument about coaches being able to change schools but players have to sit out is stupid too.

coaches are on contract.  if they break their contract they have to pay back millions of dollars.  how many students would rather pay the school a million dollars than sit out a year?

again it comes back to the basic principles.

Students =/= Employees

trying to compare this to an employee/employer relationship is absurd.  its like trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  most people figured out that doesn't work in preschool.

[Cotton]

the argument about coaches being able to change schools but players have to sit out is stupid too.

coaches are on contract.  if they break their contract they have to pay back millions of dollars.  how many students would rather pay the school a million dollars than sit out a year?

again it comes back to the basic principles.

Students =/= Employees

trying to compare this to an employee/employer relationship is absurd.  its like trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  most people figured out that doesn't work in preschool.

ummm Coaches are getting paid millions too? And the coach never pays the buyout either. That's 2 problems with your argument already.

The main argument is that if a coach leaves, the players should be able to transfer without sitting out. How is that not a fair proposal?

[AUSTXHOG]

What about all the avg. DI and lower division athletes?  Are their images being used for profit, or is the argument being made as a team sport?  The majority of student athletes across all divisions and sports are at college for an education, not to come in for a year and go pro.  For those individuals, the education, training, access to facilities, etc... is it enough?  I'd say so.



To me the rub is with the one and done players.

[Fatty McGee]

Dude, seriously? You think this is awesome? You must be a young 'un.

I think anytime the ridiculous hypocrisy of the NCAA is exposed is awesome.  Especially when it's done in a humorous way.

[Fatty McGee]

the argument about coaches being able to change schools but players have to sit out is stupid too.

coaches are on contract.  if they break their contract they have to pay back millions of dollars.  how many students would rather pay the school a million dollars than sit out a year?

again it comes back to the basic principles.

Students =/= Employees

trying to compare this to an employee/employer relationship is absurd.  its like trying to force a square peg into a round hole.  most people figured out that doesn't work in preschool.

Scholarship FBS athletes in revenue sports =/= students.  They even created a special name for them (mostly to avoid workers comp, but still) - "student athletes".

[Fatty McGee]

if it was entitlement why did they quit making NCAA games using the likeness of players?  while I agree that a sense of entitlement exists, asking to be compensated a little bit because they are making millions for a "non-profit" organization isn't exactly entitlement.  if someone was using your likeness without you asking all while making millions of dollars is it entitlement to ask to get paid for it?

is the sense of entitlement the whole reason you are so up in arms about this?  I am generally curious.  you say "if they have it so bad, go get a real job" but then wouldn't they be wasting their talents by selling shoes down at Payless?  kids are recruited and play sports because they have a talent, why not compensate them a little bit for that talent?

In a world of billion dollar TV contracts going to conferences made up of non profit entities presumably set up to further education, it's humorous when the PLAYERS are accused of having an entitlement mentality.

Or do people think all that money is paid to watch Jeff Long administrate and Bret Bielema stare at an empty field?

[Fatty McGee]

Every single one of these young people have the option to enter the real world and earn a pay check after graduating HS, but the mean ole NCAA forces them to attend class and play a game for free.

I really do not get the sense of entitlement in this whole issue. If they have it so bad, go get a real job.

When did America become a place where desiring to maximize the value of your talent free of collusion was called a "sense of entitlement"?

If all the schools got together and agreed to only pay head coaches $500,000 a year, and the coaches sued to stop the schools from doing that, would we be accusing the coaches of having an unjust "sense of entitlement"?

[HognotinMemphis]

Athletes are "taking seats from paying students."

http://deadspin.com/the-askemmert-q-a-is-going-poorly-1564610605?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow


@JayBilas: NCAA President says athletes are "taking seats from a paying student." Wow.

@bomani_jones: all this "emmert really just works for the presidents" ignore that he is of that tribe. he IS them. how stupid are y'all, really?

@Andy_Staples: Whoever writes his talking points must hate him. RT @JayBilas: NCAA President says athletes are "taking seats from a paying student." Wow.

If you have twitter go search #AskEmmert and you'll be laughing for an hour straight. Here's an example:

@jmaz: #AskEmmert Started calling my household employees "student-servants" and stopped paying them. All good, right?

I do not know anything about the context of this statement but taking it on its face, he is correct. However, the tuition, fees, etc the universities are foregoing by having athletes around are more than made up for by the hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues and donations they make in one year from men's basketball and football. So, obviously a silly statement by Emmert.

[SquidBilly]

Emmert is an idiot saying it the way he did.  You can't call them student athletes and then say they are taking seats from paying students.  Yes they get advantages that other students don't but they also earn every bit of what they get through blood and sweat.  They are also subject to more scrutiny than normal students.  How many sites are there set up to discuss ad nauseum the goings on of the math or chess clubs and to scrutinize the performance of each member.  I'm not for paying college athletes but Emmert doesn't help his cause with comments like these.

[PorkSoda]

When did America become a place where desiring to maximize the value of your talent free of collusion was called a "sense of entitlement"?

If all the schools got together and agreed to only pay head coaches $500,000 a year, and the coaches sued to stop the schools from doing that, would we be accusing the coaches of having an unjust "sense of entitlement"?

students are not employees coaches are.  there is a difference

[PorkSoda]

ummm Coaches are getting paid millions too? And the coach never pays the buyout either. That's 2 problems with your argument already.

The main argument is that if a coach leaves, the players should be able to transfer without sitting out. How is that not a fair proposal?

the buy out must be paid by contract.  if the school hiring the coach doesn't pay it as part of their compensation package it would be the responsibility of the coach to pay.

players can transfer.  the rules regarding transferring are for the benefit of the student.  they should get the opportunity to focus on getting their school work in order rather than being forced to be game ready right off the bat. 

[LZH]

instead of being allowed to play a professional sport they instead are in all sense of the word forced to not only attend a university where they aren't paid, they have to go to classes they don't want to go to and live in a place they don't want to live.

What?  No one is forcing them to do anything.  If going to school is so awful then they can spend the required year or two training for their pro career.  They obviously aren't worried about the class credits anyway.

[nextlevel]

students are not employees coaches are.  there is a difference

Apparently when a student pays for school to earn a degree and part of earning that degree includes working for revenue producing businesses for free (Internships, clinicals, etc) that is OK.

When a Student-Athlete is required to participate in a sport to pay for their school, that isn't enough and they should be given more.

[PorkSoda]

What?  No one is forcing them to do anything.  If going to school is so awful then they can spend the required year or two training for their pro career.  They obviously aren't worried about the class credits anyway.

since there are plenty of players competing for a chance to get a scholarship.  I have a hard time thinking that the 'compensation package' offered is not sufficient.

[PorkSoda]

so you guys wanting to turn the NCAA into a pro league.  are you ready to institute the draft out of high school?  sure student wont get to choose the coach/program they want to play for, they would be able to be traded, bought and sold like slaves and the best players out of high school would go to the worst teams, but at least they would be able to hire agents to negotiate contracts, and there would be no need to get an education. 

[rljjr]

Very few have the ability to do that.  It amazes me that some are even in college.  I have students turn in papers and expect that they'll get an 'A' just for turning it in because they received that sort of "special" treatment in high school, simply by virtue of being a good athlete. 

Ultimately, there are a lot of athletes who are forced into worthless degree programs by their coaches, just to keep them eligible.  It's embarrassing but a lot of the guys you watch on tv may end up with a worthless piece of paper because they went to class regularly.

Yes indeed. This is the kind of thing that devalues the degrees of "regular" students. But, we all want a winning sports team because that gets your University's name on TV and the internet. It sways a lot of "regular" students to go to the school they chose because there is a certain pride or love for watching your team on TV. 

[Fatty McGee]

students are not employees coaches are.  there is a difference

The only reason they aren't employees is because about 40 years ago the NCAA made up the term "student athletes". 

If every industry made up a term for its workers then collusion on what to pay them would be ok? 

[PorkSoda]

The only reason they aren't employees is because about 40 years ago the NCAA made up the term "student athletes". 

If every industry made up a term for its workers then collusion on what to pay them would be ok? 

you truely are delusional.  the closest thing they are to an employee is an intern.

[Fatty McGee]

so you guys wanting to turn the NCAA into a pro league.  are you ready to institute the draft out of high school?  sure student wont get to choose the coach/program they want to play for, they would be able to be traded, bought and sold like slaves and the best players out of high school would go to the worst teams, but at least they would be able to hire agents to negotiate contracts, and there would be no need to get an education. 

Little hysterical aren't you?

[Fatty McGee]

you truely are delusional

You don't have to believe the facts, but they remain the facts.

[Fatty McGee]

since there are plenty of players competing for a chance to get a scholarship.  I have a hard time thinking that the 'compensation package' offered is not sufficient.

Maybe it is.  Let's remove the collusion and find out.

[PorkSoda]

Little hysterical aren't you?

nope just pointing out how absurd the idea of a pro sports model being introduced into the college game.

[Fatty McGee]

the rules regarding transferring are for the benefit of the student. 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. 

Well, we've found Emmert's PR guy. 

[PorkSoda]

Maybe it is.  Let's remove the collusion and find out.

let not.  that would require abolishing the NCAA.

the NCAA is the schools coming together and agreeing on a set of rule for sports competition of its members.

[PorkSoda]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. 

Well, we've found Emmert's PR guy. 

thought you would like that one.

[PorkSoda]

You don't have to believe the facts, but they remain the facts.

yes, its was a vast conspiracy to repress athletes, and had nothing to do with regulating fair competition between schools.  smoke another one dude.

[Fatty McGee]

let not.  that would require abolishing the NCAA.

the NCAA is the schools coming together and agreeing on a set of rule for sports competition of its members.

They can agree on many rules.  They just can't agree on what the players are entitled to get for their skills.  At least I think that'll be the result.

[Fatty McGee]

yes, its was a vast conspiracy to repress athletes, and had nothing to do with regulating fair competition between schools.  smoke another one dude.

History, brother.  It's real:  http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/

"A fairy-tale version of the founding of the NCAA holds that President Theodore Roosevelt, upset by a photograph of a bloodied Swarthmore College player, vowed to civilize or destroy football. The real story is that Roosevelt maneuvered shrewdly to preserve the sport—and give a boost to his beloved Harvard. After McClure's magazine published a story on corrupt teams with phantom students, a muckraker exposed Walter Camp's $100,000 slush fund at Yale. In response to mounting outrage, Roosevelt summoned leaders from Harvard, Princeton, and Yale to the White House, where Camp parried mounting criticism and conceded nothing irresponsible in the college football rules he'd established. At Roosevelt's behest, the three schools issued a public statement that college sports must reform to survive, and representatives from 68 colleges founded a new organization that would soon be called the National Collegiate Athletic Association. A Haverford College official was confirmed as secretary but then promptly resigned in favor of Bill Reid, the new Harvard coach, who instituted new rules that benefited Harvard's playing style at the expense of Yale's. At a stroke, Roosevelt saved football and dethroned Yale."

[PorkSoda]

History, brother.  It's real:  http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/

"A fairy-tale version of the founding of the NCAA holds that President Theodore Roosevelt, upset by a photograph of a bloodied Swarthmore College player, vowed to civilize or destroy football. The real story is that Roosevelt maneuvered shrewdly to preserve the sport—and give a boost to his beloved Harvard. After McClure's magazine published a story on corrupt teams with phantom students, a muckraker exposed Walter Camp's $100,000 slush fund at Yale. In response to mounting outrage, Roosevelt summoned leaders from Harvard, Princeton, and Yale to the White House, where Camp parried mounting criticism and conceded nothing irresponsible in the college football rules he'd established. At Roosevelt's behest, the three schools issued a public statement that college sports must reform to survive, and representatives from 68 colleges founded a new organization that would soon be called the National Collegiate Athletic Association. A Haverford College official was confirmed as secretary but then promptly resigned in favor of Bill Reid, the new Harvard coach, who instituted new rules that benefited Harvard's playing style at the expense of Yale's. At a stroke, Roosevelt saved football and dethroned Yale."

what is your point?  that there has always been some form of cheating?  thank you captain obvious.

[Fatty McGee]

what is your point?  that there has always been some form of cheating?  thank you captain obvious.

I was simply responding to your claim that I was delusional in saying "student athlete" is a made up term used to deny benefits and the NCAA is just to regulate fair competition between schools.

Really, you should read that article.  It's fascinating.

[PorkSoda]

I was simply responding to your claim that I was delusional in saying "student athlete" is a made up term used to deny benefits.

Really, you should read that article.  It's fascinating.

I fail to see how your post supports that the term student athlete was created to repress students who also happen to be athletes

[Bacons Rebellion]

It seems to me that the question about a student getting any worthless degree is "Why would the university have a degree program that is worthless?"

[PorkSoda]

"Even in the increasingly commercial modern world," said a federal-court judge in Gaines v. NCAA in 1990, "this Court believes there is still validity to the Athenian concept of a complete education derived from fostering the full growth of both mind and body." The fact that "the NCAA has not distilled amateurism to its purest form," said the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1988, "does not mean its attempts to maintain a mixture containing some amateur elements are unreasonable."

[PorkSoda]

I thought this was the most compelling argument in the whole article.

"FOR ALL OUR queasiness about what would happen if some athletes were to get paid, there is a successful precedent for the professionalization of an amateur sports system: the Olympics. For years, Walter Byers waged war with the NCAA's older and more powerful nemesis, the Amateur Athletic Union, which since 1894 had overseen U.S. Olympic athletes. Run in high-handed fashion, the AAU had infamously banned Jesse Owens for life in 1936—weeks after his four heroic gold medals punctured the Nazi claim of Aryan supremacy—because instead of using his sudden fame to tour and make money for the AAU at track meets across Europe, he came home early. In the early 1960s, the fights between the NCAA and the AAU over who should manage Olympic athletes become so bitter that President Kennedy called in General Douglas MacArthur to try to mediate a truce before the Tokyo Olympic Games.

Ultimately, Byers prevailed and effectively neutered the AAU. In November 1978, President Jimmy Carter signed the bipartisan Amateur Sports Act. Amateurism in the Olympics soon dissolved—and the world did not end. Athletes, granted a 20 percent voting stake on every Olympic sport's governing body, tipped balances in the United States and then inexorably around the world. First in marathon races, then in tennis tournaments, players soon were allowed to accept prize money and keep their Olympic eligibility. Athletes profited from sponsorships and endorsements. The International Olympic Committee expunged the word amateur from its charter in 1986. Olympic officials, who had once disdained the NCAA for offering scholarships in exchange for athletic performance, came to welcome millionaire athletes from every quarter, while the NCAA still refused to let the pro Olympian Michael Phelps swim for his college team at Michigan.

This sweeping shift left the Olympic reputation intact, and perhaps improved. Only hardened romantics mourned the amateur code. "Hey, come on," said Anne Audain, a track-and-field star who once held the world record for the 5,000 meters. "It's like losing your virginity. You're a little misty for awhile, but then you realize, Wow, there's a whole new world out there!"

[bigredone]

It seems to me that the question about a student getting any worthless degree is "Why would the university have a degree program that is worthless?"

Because this society has decreed that everyone is completely equal in every regard instead of the founding principle of everyone having equal opportunity.

With the belief that everyone is completely equal if someone fails a college course it has to be unfair in some way. To make it fair you have to offer courses that morons can proceed through without any requirement to understand anything. You have to quit keeping score because it is not fair that some are more talented in certain areas than others.

This crap starts in preschool and goes all the way through college. Hard facts are meaningless to most people any more. Because of this society as a whole is worse off.

Some athletes can be good students, possibly even most of them. Just because you are a great athlete doesn't mean you should be in college working on a bull spit degree that means nothing. B.S. should be Bachelor of Science and have real meaning instead of bull spit.

The NCAA should have no more interest in an athlete going pro than a student becoming a scientist. It should be less concerned about the pro sports because that scientist might actually make the world a better place.

Let the NFL, NBA, and MLB do whatever they want in regards to pro athletes. Colleges that offer athletic scholarships should be looking to have kids for 4 years of study. Everything should be planned around that and schools that have kids leaving early should see some kind of punishment, maybe not being able to fill that spot with a scholarship until that class has graduated.

[Kenny Hawgins]

It seems to me that the question about a student getting any worthless degree is "Why would the university have a degree program that is worthless?"

$$$

For example, Interdisciplinary Studies degrees.  IMO, a high school diploma is an Interdisciplinary Studies degree but universities use these for folks who can't meet program standards for certain degrees but are willing to keep paying for a degree.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

They can agree on many rules.  They just can't agree on what the players are entitled to get for their skills.  At least I think that'll be the result.

This thread has certainly covered many controversial topics with regard to the quasi-"student athlete" in college sports.

Should college athletes be paid? At least in part, they already are by receiving their scholarships and all of the benefits (academic, athletic, other undocumented monies/benefits, etc.) that come with that. When you see a kid that comes from a middle class or lower class financial situation suddenly driving an Escalade (as an example) after he arrives on campus, you know that usually, something is going on that has changed their previous financial status. Did all of these kids suddenly receive an inheritance or other financial windfall? Probably not, and this of course is a Red Flag.

Should student-athletes be paid $5,000, $10,000, $15,000 or more per year on top of what they receive in scholarship money? Next thing that might happen is that these kids begin to be classified as "employees" of the university as opposed to scholarship athletes and if that should turn out to be the case, then all of the benefits that they receive from the university might then be defined as taxable benefits by the IRS. Do you really want to be taxed on the benefit of a value of a $20K to $75K scholarship (depending on your school) each year? I say, be careful what you ask for.

That being said, unless kids sign over the use of their image by the university or any private party in return for a scholarship to any particular university during their tenure at that school, they should probably be right in expecting some percentage of income from the use of their image in revenue producing activities, whether from the school they play for or from other public or private business interests that earn income from the use of their image. But beware "student-athletes", this could suddenly put you in a significantly different tax bracket.

I would agree that there should be a rule change that allows athletes to transfer and be immediately eligible when the HC that signed them is either fired or takes a job at another school.

That really is, fair. After all, if a true student (as opposed to a student-athlete) enrolled at a university for a particular field of study because they wanted to study under a particular professor or business school (as an example) that was nationally recognized and that they felt would lend greater value to their ultimate degree, would they not be allowed to transfer and enroll at the school that this Professor went to and study for credit immediately? Of course they could. It might cost them transfer credits or even a higher tuition, but they would certainly be allowed to do so. It should be no different for Student-Athletes. That is equality of treatment in that regard and should be no different for athletics than it is for those of the academic persuasion.

There is a lot to be debated here and I doubt we are all going to agree. But there are certainly some things that do need to be changed.

[LRHog234]

 

I would like to live in this magical world that you live in where every person walking the earth has the ability to earn a college degree.  yes, they are given a life changing opportunity, that isn't the point.  again, you are forcing them to do something they don't want to do, and maybe aren't smart enough to do.  you can offer someone all the scholarships and academic help in the world, but if they aren't smart enough to make sense of it what good does it do them?  how is that any type of compensation? 

no one is saying that a scholarship isn't valuable.  it has zero to do with being short sighted, offering a scholarship to someone who doesn't want it is like offering filet mignon to a vegetarian.

[/quote]

having the right to do something isn't what's at hand here though.  instead of being allowed to play a professional sport they instead are in all sense of the word forced to not only attend a university where they aren't paid, they have to go to classes they don't want to go to and live in a place they don't want to live.  if they are going to make them go to school, even for a year, why is compensating them with something besides a degree such an issue?  by making them go to class they don't want to be in, and live in a dorm they don't want to stay in, are they not hurting not only the athlete, but also other students who are interested in that spot in class, or that place to live?

and yes, basketball players have the option to go oversea's, but you can't count those success stories on your hands.  so now you are telling an 18 year old kid who wants to play basketball that his options are 1.) go to "school" for a year and don't get compensated at all, oh, and also go to class, live in a dorm and follow these rules, or 2.) go over to Germany and live for a year away from all of your family and friends, and oh, did I mention they don't speak English there either?

This is the silliest thing I've read in a while. I want to be the Athletic Director for the University of Arkansas some day. But guess what, I need the proper education and training in order to do so. I'm not getting paid to gain the skills neccesary(quite the contrary actually), and I have to eat rice-a-roni and a chicken breast 6 days a week for dinner. Oh, and btw if athletes think they have it bad imagine having to pay the University for 11 credit hours for practicum credits, which essentially means you give the University your $$$ then you're eligible to get an unpaid internship while trying to hold down a job and going to the classes you're also paying for.

And how is that any different from anyone else? I want to be successful when I grow up in whatever field I choose, my only options are 1) Take out more student loans that what I can hope to make in the next 15-20 years, 2) Land a job at McDonalds and hope that the Univeristy of Arkansas likes me and brings me on as Associate Athletic Director(gotta start somewhere) Life is hard friends, might as well appreciate what you have already.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I would like to live in this magical world that you live in where every person walking the earth has the ability to earn a college degree.  yes, they are given a life changing opportunity, that isn't the point.  again, you are forcing them to do something they don't want to do, and maybe aren't smart enough to do.  you can offer someone all the scholarships and academic help in the world, but if they aren't smart enough to make sense of it what good does it do them?  how is that any type of compensation? 

no one is saying that a scholarship isn't valuable.  it has zero to do with being short sighted, offering a scholarship to someone who doesn't want it is like offering filet mignon to a vegetarian.






This is the silliest thing I've read in a while. I want to be the Athletic Director for the University of Arkansas some day. But guess what, I need the proper education and training in order to do so. I'm not getting paid to gain the skills neccesary(quite the contrary actually), and I have to eat rice-a-roni and a chicken breast 6 days a week for dinner. Oh, and btw if athletes think they have it bad imagine having to pay the University for 11 credit hours for practicum credits, which essentially means you give the University your $$$ then you're eligible to get an unpaid internship while trying to hold down a job and going to the classes you're also paying for.

And how is that any different from anyone else? I want to be successful when I grow up in whatever field I choose, my only options are 1) Take out more student loans that what I can hope to make in the next 15-20 years, 2) Land a job at McDonalds and hope that the Univeristy of Arkansas likes me and brings me on as Associate Athletic Director(gotta start somewhere) Life is hard friends, might as well appreciate what you have already.

Who are you answering aside from what you cited? That would be helpful in a formulating a response.

[Break & Run]

So student athletes, on basis of tuition and room & board ALONE are making approximately $20,000 a year.  That's tax-free money.  So, if you take that $20,000 and figure adding an additional 30% on that for various taxes/soc. sec./medicare costs, etc., you're looking at each full-scholarship student athlete making approximately $29,000 a year. 

According to this wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States), that's more than half the income of a 2-person household income.  Therefore, these student athletes, on the basis of TUITION and ROOM&BOARD alone, make more than 50% of the average American yearly income. 

That's not to add in other luxuries they receive.

Here's some samples:
4 pairs of Nike shoes at $110/each : $440.
15 hog Nike t-shirts at $25/each : $375.
15 hog Nike shorts $15/each : $225.
25 pair of Nike undergarments at $10/each : $250.
25 pair of Nike socks at $5/each : $125.

State-of-the-art weight room and training (estimate it to cost about $150/month): $1800/year.

The extras equal an estimated $3215.  Again, that's items they receive without having to pay taxes on, which is another 8-9%, so lets add that $250 to it as well.  So the extra cost is around $3500.

This is per student-athlete on every football team in Div 1 (depending on the brand of their school).

Each student-athlete is making around $33,000 per year.  That's more than double the salary of a cashier at Walmart, who helps the corporation make billions per year.

Student-athletes sign a scholarship agreement agreeing to the terms that they'll receive tuition and room&board at no cost to them as long as they prove to be a function member of said sports team.

Get over it, these athletes only think they deserve more money because they are being brain-washed by money-hungry agents.

[Break & Run]

They might be getting goods and services worth that amount. But they aren't "making" that much money.

After all, if they decided to sell a pair of those shoes to pay for dinner and movie with their girlfriend, they'd be in NCAA violation.

Loopholes to those.  Give them to the girlfriend as a gift then she sells them.  Bam, date money!

[Kenny Hawgins]

So student athletes, on basis of tuition and room & board ALONE are making approximately $20,000 a year.  That's tax-free money.  So, if you take that $20,000 and figure adding an additional 30% on that for various taxes/soc. sec./medicare costs, etc., you're looking at each full-scholarship student athlete making approximately $29,000 a year. 

According to this wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States), that's more than half the income of a 2-person household income.  Therefore, these student athletes, on the basis of TUITION and ROOM&BOARD alone, make more than 50% of the average American yearly income. 

That's not to add in other luxuries they receive.

Here's some samples:
4 pairs of Nike shoes at $110/each : $440.
15 hog Nike t-shirts at $25/each : $375.
15 hog Nike shorts $15/each : $225.
25 pair of Nike undergarments at $10/each : $250.
25 pair of Nike socks at $5/each : $125.

State-of-the-art weight room and training (estimate it to cost about $150/month): $1800/year.

The extras equal an estimated $3215.  Again, that's items they receive without having to pay taxes on, which is another 8-9%, so lets add that $250 to it as well.  So the extra cost is around $3500.

This is per student-athlete on every football team in Div 1 (depending on the brand of their school).

Each student-athlete is making around $33,000 per year.  That's more than double the salary of a cashier at Walmart, who helps the corporation make billions per year.

Student-athletes sign a scholarship agreement agreeing to the terms that they'll receive tuition and room&board at no cost to them as long as they prove to be a function member of said sports team.

Get over it, these athletes only think they deserve more money because they are being brain-washed by money-hungry agents.

Or maybe it's because they see everyone else getting a cut of the multi-billion dollar product that they're putting on the field and, in many cases, they're unable to afford basic stuff.  Before you say otherwise (out of ignorance), I can tell you I've had college athletes that couldn't afford a decent coat during the winter and I was unable to give them one due to NCAA rules.  Heck, some of them couldn't afford to make it home on major holidays and had to stay on campus.

Your comparison to a Walmart cashier is silly.  Without these athletes, there would be no college football; Walmart can easily replace cashiers (heck, they don't even need them with self-checkout). 

On top of that, the athletes take on the risk of serious injury that could affect them for the rest of their lives.  I've seen some of my former athletes have several surgeries to repair injured knees and still end up with problems that will affect them forever.  It's easy for someone who wasn't an athlete, and has no clue about what they go through, to criticize.  God forbid someone want a small chunk of the revenues that they bring into their universities and communities.

[Break & Run]

Or maybe it's because they see everyone else getting a cut of the multi-billion dollar product that they're putting on the field and, in many cases, they're unable to afford basic stuff.  Before you say otherwise (out of ignorance), I can tell you I've had college athletes that couldn't afford a decent coat during the winter and I was unable to give them one due to NCAA rules.  Heck, some of them couldn't afford to make it home on major holidays and had to stay on campus.

Your comparison to a Walmart cashier is silly.  Without these athletes, there would be no college football; Walmart can easily replace cashiers (heck, they don't even need them with self-checkout). 

On top of that, the athletes take on the risk of serious injury that could affect them for the rest of their lives.  I've seen some of my former athletes have several surgeries to repair injured knees and still end up with problems that will affect them forever.  It's easy for someone who wasn't an athlete, and has no clue about what they go through, to criticize.  God forbid someone want a small chunk of the revenues that they bring into their universities and communities.

It's called occupational hazard.  They know what could potentially happen when they play the sport.  Yes, it sucks when it actually happens but it's something they knew could happen when they started playing.

As far as going home for holidays, etc., those student athletes can STILL take out student loans.  I'd say that the $2500/semester they're allowed to borrow from federal student loans would be more then enough to help buy a coat and make it home during the holidays.  That's because everything else that regular students pay for out of pocket is being picked up by the university.

[Kenny Hawgins]

It's called occupational hazard.  They know what could potentially happen when they play the sport.  Yes, it sucks when it actually happens but it's something they knew could happen when they started playing.

As far as going home for holidays, etc., those student athletes can STILL take out student loans.  I'd say that the $2500/semester they're allowed to borrow from federal student loans would be more then enough to help buy a coat and make it home during the holidays.  That's because everything else that regular students pay for out of pocket is being picked up by the university.

Interesting that you use the term "occupational hazard" since they're supposed to be "student-athletes".  Since it's now an occupation, according to you, you should have no problem with them wanting more reimbursement for their services.

As for the student loans, isn't the argument typically that they don't have to pay back loans after they graduate? 

[Break & Run]

That's the thing: being a football student-athlete is a job that THEY ARE BEING PAID FOR!!! They're making $30,000 a year. And yes, you pay student loans back but a career in your expert field will yield a high enough return that u can make the loan payments easy enough.

And we ALL KNOW the elite athletes get money from bag men. Everywhere, including Arkansas.

[Kenny Hawgins]

That's the thing: being a football student-athlete is a job that THEY ARE BEING PAID FOR!!! They're making $30,000 a year. And yes, you pay student loans back but a career in your expert field will yield a high enough return that u can make the loan payments easy enough.

And we ALL KNOW the elite athletes get money from bag men. Everywhere, including Arkansas.

If you're going to continue making this argument, you need to at least frame the argument correctly.  You're supposed to keep saying these are student-athletes.  If, in fact, they are employees, then they're vastly underpaid relative to what they're worth. 

[Break & Run]

If you're going to continue making this argument, you need to at least frame the argument correctly.  You're supposed to keep saying these are student-athletes.  If, in fact, they are employees, then they're vastly underpaid relative to what they're worth. 

There are hardly any employees in corporate America that are paid what they're worth.

[impact]

Institute a minor league/developmental league similar to baseball for football and basketball straight out of high school sponsored by the NFL/NBA teams.

Each baseball team has farm teams to develop players for the big leagues.

When all of the major talent decides not to go to college or deal with the NCAA hypocrisy to play, the NCAA will raise heck for all of the billions of dollars they would stand to lose.  You all would get your glorious "student athlete" back.

[Flatline]

A student can get a job and go out like most young people do at college and spend that money.  An athlete cannot work so if their from a poor family then they are stuck doing nothing on their free time.

A student does not have to get up a 5 a.m. and workout then go to class and then back to practice and then study hall and then film and then bed.  A lot of you think that athletes have it made, but the truth is that it is very hard and their is a great deal of pressure compared to a regular student. 

[Kenny Hawgins]

There are hardly any employees in corporate America that are paid what they're worth.

Not much of an argument.