Pay to Play

[labb]

How long before the talking heads begin to justify it.

[hogsanity]

about a decade ago

[onebadrubi]

If someone is paying under the table now, what makes you believe they just won't pay under the table above the salary cap?  It doesn't fix the handouts and under the table dealings.

[Karma]

If someone is paying under the table now, what makes you believe they just won't pay under the table above the salary cap?  It doesn't fix the handouts and under the table dealings.

Who said anything about a salary cap?

[Hawg Red]

If someone is paying under the table now, what makes you believe they just won't pay under the table above the salary cap?  It doesn't fix the handouts and under the table dealings.

Doesn't matter if people break rules. The players deserve to be paid. You are going to have a flawed system either way, so it might as well be fair to the those that are truly generating the revenue.

[onebadrubi]

Who said anything about a salary cap?

Oh really?  no salary cap?  That would be a free for all and destroy college basketball all together.

[onebadrubi]

Doesn't matter if people break rules. The players deserve to be paid. You are going to have a flawed system either way, so it might as well be fair to the those that are truly generating the revenue.

I just disagree.  I say let the ones that want to go pro, go.  Force all the others to follow the baseball rules.  They are playing for a degree is the way I look at it.  I don't want to see the NCAA become a minor league system. 

Now, if you want to discuss where the profits go from the NCAA I am all for that.  Even for something along the lines of a bonus upon degree completion maybe.  I just do not want college athletics to leave the ultimate goal of an education behind. 

[sickboy]

If someone is paying under the table now, what makes you believe they just won't pay under the table above the salary cap?  It doesn't fix the handouts and under the table dealings.

This is a bad, bad argument. And it's not just an argument you hear when it comes to college basketball, you hear it all the time when it comes to legislation at all levels. What I'm talking about is the idea that you shouldn't make a change to a flawed system simply because the change would still be flawed. That's ridiculous. It's a good way to make sure nothing ever gets fixed and the system dies.

Think of it this way. If your house has a leaky roof, do you just ignore it and say, "eh, I can fix the leak, but it'd just get another leak at some point, so what's the point?" No, you fix the leak. And when another leak pops up, you find a way to fix that leak and so and so forth.

College athletics is the leaky roof. And you can ignore the leak if you want, but at your own peril. The roof will collapse at some point if it's not tended to.

[Hawg Red]

I just disagree.  I say let the ones that want to go pro, go.  Force all the others to follow the baseball rules.  They are playing for a degree is the way I look at it.  I don't want to see the NCAA become a minor league system. 

Now, if you want to discuss where the profits go from the NCAA I am all for that.  Even for something along the lines of a bonus upon degree completion maybe.  I just do not want college athletics to leave the ultimate goal of an education behind.

I don't see what the big deal is paying the players during the season if you're still holding them to the same academic standards while in school. You are going to miss out on a lot of talented players that could play 1-2 seasons in college if you force them to stay 3 years if they don't go pro out of high school. That kind of ultimatum is also going to force a lot of players to make a bad decision to go pro, which kind of flies in the face of some of the logic behind forcing them to stay in school. Pretty contradictory. Players develop at different rates and having some arbitrary, blanket length of time they have to stay in school if they don't go pro out of high school just doesn't make any sense. It only benefits the schools, who are already getting over by raking in all this money and not sharing it with the students-athletes.

[onebadrubi]

This is a bad, bad argument. And it's not just an argument you hear when it comes to college basketball, you hear it all the time when it comes to legislation at all levels. What I'm talking about is the idea that you shouldn't make a change to a flawed system simply because the change would still be flawed. That's ridiculous. It's a good way to make sure nothing ever gets fixed and the system dies.

Think of it this way. If your house has a leaky roof, do you just ignore it and say, "eh, I can fix the leak, but it'd just get another leak at some point, so what's the point?" No, you fix the leak. And when another leak pops up, you find a way to fix that leak and so and so forth.

College athletics is the leaky roof. And you can ignore the leak if you want, but at your own peril. The roof will collapse at some point if it's not tended to.

it's only a bad argument in your eyes because you do not support it.  Using your antics, when you have a leaky roof you are advocating for demolishing the house instead of fixing the roof.  See, we can both play this game of analogies. 

Not to get personal, but you really failed at understanding my post, and I have to wonder if it is just because you support the opposite.  However, you can not just unleash the checkbook on college players.  That is asinine.  You want to pay players, sure go right ahead and you will strive corruption.  So paying them solved nothing at this point.  You think Sean Miller and Calipari going head to head and only having 25,000 left of salary cap is going to stop them from getting a booster to throw in a brief case full of cash?  no way.  Why??  Because it's they way they have been doing it already.  So you end up back at square one. 

The problem comes in because we have not been enforcing the current rules. 

[onebadrubi]

I don't see what the big deal is paying the players during the season if you're still holding them to the same academic standards while in school. You are going to miss out on a lot of talented players that could play 1-2 seasons in college if you force them to stay 3 years if they don't go pro out of high school. That kind of ultimatum is also going to force a lot of players to make a bad decision to go pro, which kind of flies in the face of some of the logic behind forcing them to stay in school. Pretty contradictory. Players develop at different rates and having some arbitrary, blanket length of time they have to stay in school if they don't go pro out of high school just doesn't make any sense. It only benefits the schools, who are already getting over by raking in all this money and not sharing it with the students-athletes.

So you want profit sharing, just like the NBA.  You are advocating for just an NBA youth league at this point. 

Look, college baseball still gets many stars every year.  College baseball is actually a fantastic model to follow.  Look at the level of competition you have, such little corruption it appears, and you have many kids getting degrees. I also think the NBA product would be better.  However, the NBA does not support it because they want the marketing of these kids ASAP.  At this point in the argument, IMO, it's a catch 22. 

[Hawg Red]

So you want profit sharing, just like the NBA.  You are advocating for just an NBA youth league at this point. 

Look, college baseball still gets many stars every year.  College baseball is actually a fantastic model to follow.  Look at the level of competition you have, such little corruption it appears, and you have many kids getting degrees. I also think the NBA product would be better.  However, the NBA does not support it because they want the marketing of these kids ASAP.  At this point in the argument, IMO, it's a catch 22.

There isn't a lot of money in college baseball is there, though? They give partial scholarships. Do you see where this correlation is poor? Apples to oranges.

[hogsanity]

it's only a bad argument in your eyes because you do not support it.  Using your antics, when you have a leaky roof you are advocating for demolishing the house instead of fixing the roof.  See, we can both play this game of analogies. 

Not to get personal, but you really failed at understanding my post, and I have to wonder if it is just because you support the opposite.  However, you can not just unleash the checkbook on college players.  That is asinine.  You want to pay players, sure go right ahead and you will strive corruption.  So paying them solved nothing at this point.  You think Sean Miller and Calipari going head to head and only having 25,000 left of salary cap is going to stop them from getting a booster to throw in a brief case full of cash?  no way.  Why??  Because it's they way they have been doing it already.  So you end up back at square one. 

The problem comes in because we have not been enforcing the current rules. 

Actually the problem comes in because the NCAA, both football and basketball, is being used as a minor league system for the NFL and NBA and the players are not being compensated. And yes, I know very well the "value" of a college scholarship, but it is only valuable if the person intends to get their degree.

The only "value" in a scholarship for a one and done or two and done player is in the exposure and playing experience it gets them. Football is a little different in that their graduating class must have been 3 yrs prior to getting drafted, but the concept is the same. What value did Fournette get from his scholarship? He got to play, be a featured back, and get drafted really high and make a lot of $. 

My son is on a full ride academic. The value in that is getting a degree and coming out of school debt free. It has a $ value. Also, he is not limited on what work he can do, for pay, while he is still in school. My younger son plays baseball. IF he were to be good enough to get drafted when he is out of HS, he has the option of signing. He does not have to go to college at all.

And of course colleges do not care if baseball and hockey players go pro right of of HS because those are not big revenue sports in college. They do care about basketball and football because they are revenue sports. And while I know the draft rules are set by the pro leagues, you can bet the NCAA is really happy with the NFL rule and they'd be thrilled if the NBA adopted the same rule.

[TM Hog]

What makes me sick about all this - is that many programs (football included) decided to cheat decades ago for strong teams and now they are reaping a lot of success as a result. (Alabama, Oklahoma etc..)

[hogsanity]

There isn't a lot of money in college baseball is there, though? They give partial scholarships. Do you see where this correlation is poor? Apples to oranges.

College baseball also gets a lot of players that would rather do their time in college than banging around rookie ball, making almost nothing. For them a partial ride at a big time school like Arkansas or Fla is better, and will equate to a higher signing bonus, maybe less time in the minors that would have been had signing right out of hs.

[Atlhogfan1]

As sanity says, the NBA and NFL are a part of the problem.

As far as the NBA goes, they could be a part of the solution.  Expand their draft, add to their minor league system and allow players out of high school to be draft eligible and free agent eligible.  The NCAA could participate by agreeing to help fund it with some of the tourney money instead of paying players to play in college. 

NFL not so simple because it is too much to suggest an 18 year old should try and play on a professional level. 

[onebadrubi]

There isn't a lot of money in college baseball is there, though? They give partial scholarships. Do you see where this correlation is poor? Apples to oranges.

Correct, but that is because of Title 9 or whatever.  You can achieve similar baseball style system with full scholarships.

College baseball people always say if they had more scholarships they could get more of the kids to college that could not afford college, and end up deciding to go pro for maybe a 25,000 signing bonus or something.

[onebadrubi]

As sanity says, the NBA and NFL are a part of the problem.

As far as the NBA goes, they could be a part of the solution.  Expand their draft, add to their minor league system and allow players out of high school to be draft eligible and free agent eligible.  The NCAA could participate by agreeing to help fund it with some of the tourney money instead of paying players to play in college.

NFL not so simple because it is too much to suggest an 18 year old should try and play on a professional level.

I don't think the NBA has any reason to change the NCAA system.  They don't care and are enjoying where they are at right now. They actually hold all the cards IMO

[Atlhogfan1]

I don't think the NBA has any reason to change the NCAA system.  They don't care and are enjoying where they are at right now. They actually hold all the cards IMO

I agree. 

[Hawg Red]

Correct, but that is because of Title 9 or whatever.  You can achieve similar baseball style system with full scholarships.

College baseball people always say if they had more scholarships they could get more of the kids to college that could not afford college, and end up deciding to go pro for maybe a 25,000 signing bonus or something.

College baseball is not generating near the revenue that college football and basketball is. So bringing up the college baseball model for basketball is pointless because they aren't in the same stratosphere. If the NCAA/schools weren't making money hand over fist on basketball and football, no one would think the players should get paid. This is a problem specific to those two sports and no other college sports.

[Atlhogfan1]

How many schools make money at football and basketball?  And out of those, how many can fund their athletic departments -men's and women's - from it? 

What may need to happen is the NCAA splits.  This is more football driven but as we've discussed in MMQB, there are probably 60-75 programs who financially and competitively operate on a different level.  In college basketball, it's way less than 150.  Either a reformed, true D1 needs to evolve or a completely new entity.  Then discuss paying players more than the cost of living expenses in those two sports. 

[Hawg Red]

How many schools make money at football and basketball?  And out of those, how many can fund their athletic departments -men's and women's - from it? 

What may need to happen is the NCAA splits.  This is more football driven but as we've discussed in MMQB, there are probably 60-75 programs who financially and competitively operate on a different level.  In college basketball, it's way less than 150.  Either a reformed, true D1 needs to evolve or a completely new entity.  Then discuss paying players more than the cost of living expenses in those two sports.

That's what would have to happen. It could never work where every single D1 program is paying players because D1 basketball is way too bloated. Way too bloated. The SWAC, MEAC, etc. should not be D1 conferences. The women's sports will be a big obstacle because they will want to claim some of this money even though those programs surely do not operate in the black on their own.

[hogsanity]

How many schools make money at football and basketball?  And out of those, how many can fund their athletic departments -men's and women's - from it? 

What may need to happen is the NCAA splits.  This is more football driven but as we've discussed in MMQB, there are probably 60-75 programs who financially and competitively operate on a different level.  In college basketball, it's way less than 150.  Either a reformed, true D1 needs to evolve or a completely new entity.  Then discuss paying players more than the cost of living expenses in those two sports. 

I've been saying this for years. NCAA needs to split football into the top 64-80 teams. Fake fbs teams like Buffalo and Arky St ( sorry, could not resist ) need to be in a different division. Basketball being at 351 is ridiculous as well. If the NCAA does not do it, then eventually the top football schools will do it themselves.

[onebadrubi]

College baseball is not generating near the revenue that college football and basketball is. So bringing up the college baseball model for basketball is pointless because they aren't in the same stratosphere. If the NCAA/schools weren't making money hand over fist on basketball and football, no one would think the players should get paid. This is a problem specific to those two sports and no other college sports.

I'm not sure if saying because baseball does not generate the same revenue means it's system is flawed or could not work. 

It won't work right now solely because the NBA will not allow it.  It would actually empower the NCAA and create better competition... That is not what the NBA wants.

[onebadrubi]

I've been saying this for years. NCAA needs to split football into the top 64-80 teams. Fake fbs teams like Buffalo and Arky St ( sorry, could not resist ) need to be in a different division. Basketball being at 351 is ridiculous as well. If the NCAA does not do it, then eventually the top football schools will do it themselves.

Where do schools like Villanova go in this scenario? 

The NCAA is not going to allow a split.  This basically allows the platform for them to lose the SEC and big revenue schools (SEC, ACC, PAC12, etc)

[hogsanity]

I'm not sure if saying because baseball does not generate the same revenue means it's system is flawed or could not work. 

It won't work right now solely because the NBA will not allow it.  It would actually empower the NCAA and create better competition... That is not what the NBA wants.

One thing people do not figure in when talking about baseball is the huge # of players the MLB teams have to have just for their farm system. Each team has 5 or 6 minor league teams, at least, so each team has 150-200 minor league players, we are talking 6,000 players. Then add in all the players actually playing college ball, another 3K or so just in the p5 leagues, and the #'s dwarf those playing any other sport.

[Atlhogfan1]

Where do schools like Villanova go in this scenario? 

The NCAA is not going to allow a split.  This basically allows the platform for them to lose the SEC and big revenue schools (SEC, ACC, PAC12, etc)

Stay in the Big East and the Big East is in whatever the top level college basketball becomes.

[Hawg Red]

Where do schools like Villanova go in this scenario? 

The NCAA is not going to allow a split.  This basically allows the platform for them to lose the SEC and big revenue schools (SEC, ACC, PAC12, etc)

The Big East has a TV contract with Fox. They are going to be involved in any power conference grouping.

[onebadrubi]

Stay in the Big East and the Big East is in whatever the top level college basketball becomes.

So schools will be in different conferences?  Meaning if you are good at basketball and bad at football you don't reap the benefits of the large profit sharing like the SEC gives now?  Example is Bama and Kentucky.  Bama has been providing huge dividends for the SEC financially in football that Kentucky gets a piece off, but bama also gets a piece of the dividends that Kentucky basketball brings in. 

Haven't thought of it this way but at first glance I think you conference commishes will not be on board.

[onebadrubi]

The Big East has a TV contract with Fox. They are going to be involved in any power conference grouping.

yes but their football is not of the big east.  So you go the way described that we are discussing, you will see a lot more of this I believe.  Schools with power house program in one sport but not the other.  So you'd want Villanova in that top 65-80 in basketball but no where to be seen in the top 150 of football.

[Atlhogfan1]

So schools will be in different conferences?  Meaning if you are good at basketball and bad at football you don't reap the benefits of the large profit sharing like the SEC gives now?  Example is Bama and Kentucky.  Bama has been providing huge dividends for the SEC financially in football that Kentucky gets a piece off, but bama also gets a piece of the dividends that Kentucky basketball brings in. 

Haven't thought of it this way but at first glance I think you conference commishes will not be on board.

ALL SEC programs would be in the top level of both.

Yes.  Some non top level football schools would be in the top level of college basketball. 

yes but their football is not of the big east.  So you go the way described that we are discussing, you will see a lot more of this I believe.  Schools with power house program in one sport but not the other.  So you'd want Villanova in that top 65-80 in basketball but no where to be seen in the top 150 of football.

Wait no.  You have your numbers backwards. 

But yes, Nova and programs like them would be in the top level of basketball and not football.     

[labb]

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)[a] is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,281 institutions, conferences, and individuals. It also organizes the athletic programs of many colleges and universities in the United States and Canada, and helps more than 480,000 college student-athletes who compete annually in college sports. The organization is headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana. In 2014, the NCAA generated almost a billion dollars in revenue. 80 to 90% of this revenue was due to the Division I Men's Basketball Tournament. This revenue is then distributed back into various organizations and institutions across the United States.[3]

What if the $$$ was all divided eaqually among all the schools? No bonus for winning anything. Same with TV revenue.

[greenEGnHAWGS]

This is a bad, bad argument. And it's not just an argument you hear when it comes to college basketball, you hear it all the time when it comes to legislation at all levels. What I'm talking about is the idea that you shouldn't make a change to a flawed system simply because the change would still be flawed. That's ridiculous. It's a good way to make sure nothing ever gets fixed and the system dies.

Think of it this way. If your house has a leaky roof, do you just ignore it and say, "eh, I can fix the leak, but it'd just get another leak at some point, so what's the point?" No, you fix the leak. And when another leak pops up, you find a way to fix that leak and so and so forth.

College athletics is the leaky roof. And you can ignore the leak if you want, but at your own peril. The roof will collapse at some point if it's not tended to.

That my friend...is an awful example. Here's a better one that's on your same thought process.

It's as though several screws on your roof are leaking. Bad thing. So instead of fixing the leak, you decide to allow ALL of the screws to leak and just try to divert the water to where you think it should go. Problem solved? Sure. But you just made it VERY easy for the house to get damaged to the point of no return. 

[hogsanity]

What if the $$$ was all divided eaqually among all the schools? No bonus for winning anything. Same with TV revenue.

Interesting thought.

[onebadrubi]

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)[a] is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,281 institutions, conferences, and individuals. It also organizes the athletic programs of many colleges and universities in the United States and Canada, and helps more than 480,000 college student-athletes who compete annually in college sports. The organization is headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana. In 2014, the NCAA generated almost a billion dollars in revenue. 80 to 90% of this revenue was due to the Division I Men's Basketball Tournament. This revenue is then distributed back into various organizations and institutions across the United States.[3]

What if the $$$ was all divided eaqually among all the schools? No bonus for winning anything. Same with TV revenue.

But this doesn't fix Sean Miller wanting to pay Ayton 100,000 to get him to come zone.  College basketball coaches aren't currently doing it so their school gets a better cut.  They are doing it to win so they can renegotiate their contract and get their incentives.  Sure, you could argue this trickles down and back to the coaches, but you still are going to have boosters pony up money for the Bama program to hire a Saban or up his contract if Texas were to come calling. 

[Hawg Red]

But this doesn't fix Sean Miller wanting to pay Ayton 100,000 to get him to come zone.  College basketball coaches aren't currently doing it so their school gets a better cut.  They are doing it to win so they can renegotiate their contract and get their incentives.  Sure, you could argue this trickles down and back to the coaches, but you still are going to have boosters pony up money for the Bama program to hire a Saban or up his contract if Texas were to come calling.

It does not matter that players will still be paid illegally. It matters to pay football and men's basketball players because it's incredibly unethical to not pay them given how much money is being generated by their play. It's far exceeded the value of a scholarship + cost of attendance. Rules will always be broken, but that's no reason not to make better rules and keep up with the times.

[labb]

But this doesn't fix Sean Miller wanting to pay Ayton 100,000 to get him to come zone.  College basketball coaches aren't currently doing it so their school gets a better cut.  They are doing it to win so they can renegotiate their contract and get their incentives.  Sure, you could argue this trickles down and back to the coaches, but you still are going to have boosters pony up money for the Bama program to hire a Saban or up his contract if Texas were to come calling. 

You take the major dollars to the school out of it and I would bet the paying of multi-millions to a football coach or a basketball coach goes away and also  bending of the rules by the programs in order to win.

[greenEGnHAWGS]

It does not matter that players will still be paid illegally. It matters to pay football and men's basketball players because it's incredibly unethical to not pay them given how much money is being generated by their play. It's far exceeded the value of a scholarship + cost of attendance. Rules will always be broken, but that's no reason not to make better rules and keep up with the times.

If this is the solution then they need to get rid of college athletics as a whole and just make semi pro sports teams. Is that the goal? If they're getting paid to play, then why even make them go to classes and maintain a certain gpa?

[31to6]

Doesn't matter if people break rules. The players deserve to be paid. You are going to have a flawed system either way, so it might as well be fair to the those that are truly generating the revenue.

Punish everyone who broke the rules. Get the the dirty coaches out of college basketball. They all knew it was against the rules and chose to cheat to win.

THEN reform the system.

It doesn't matter how you reform a system if you allow the dirty coaches, sleazy agents and hangers on with their hands out to remain in the sport and you don't punish the dirty programs in a way that sets and example you will just have the same cheaters trying new ways to get around whatever more equitable system for the players that you set up.

[onebadrubi]

It does not matter that players will still be paid illegally. It matters to pay football and men's basketball players because it's incredibly unethical to not pay them given how much money is being generated by their play. It's far exceeded the value of a scholarship + cost of attendance. Rules will always be broken, but that's no reason not to make better rules and keep up with the times.

No that is not unethical.  That is like saying it is unethical of what Amazon pays janitors or Jeff B (whatever his last name is) is unethical for how much he pays a house cleaner. 

You are grossly misusing the word unethical in a situation that has many of great examples of unethical.

[onebadrubi]

If this is the solution then they need to get rid of college athletics as a whole and just make semi pro sports teams. Is that the goal? If they're getting paid to play, then why even make them go to classes and maintain a certain gpa?

Reading his post here tell us exactly where he stands.  He wants NCAA to be a minor league for NFL and NBA just because the schools are making the big bucks. 

I personally believe college football and basketball have grown exponentially partly because of the amateurism. 

[TexHog188]

Don't think colleges can pay Mens BB and FB players without paying women's players as well.  Lawsuits will be fast quick and in a hurry.

[sickboy]

it's only a bad argument in your eyes because you do not support it.  Using your antics, when you have a leaky roof you are advocating for demolishing the house instead of fixing the roof.  See, we can both play this game of analogies. 

Not to get personal, but you really failed at understanding my post, and I have to wonder if it is just because you support the opposite.  However, you can not just unleash the checkbook on college players.  That is asinine.  You want to pay players, sure go right ahead and you will strive corruption.  So paying them solved nothing at this point.  You think Sean Miller and Calipari going head to head and only having 25,000 left of salary cap is going to stop them from getting a booster to throw in a brief case full of cash?  no way.  Why??  Because it's they way they have been doing it already.  So you end up back at square one. 

The problem comes in because we have not been enforcing the current rules. 

The difference is -- I don't think we're destroying college basketball by paying players. But I'll admit, I have a hard time following the logic of your posts.

What I'm saying is that paying players isn't going to fix the system, but it's a step in the right direction. And honestly, it's an inevitable one. It's going to happen.

[sickboy]

That my friend...is an awful example. Here's a better one that's on your same thought process.

It's as though several screws on your roof are leaking. Bad thing. So instead of fixing the leak, you decide to allow ALL of the screws to leak and just try to divert the water to where you think it should go. Problem solved? Sure. But you just made it VERY easy for the house to get damaged to the point of no return. 

Found the handyman. Thanks. Well said. Much better than mine.

[rotaryDial]

Think of it this way. If your house has a leaky roof, do you just ignore it and say, "eh, I can fix the leak, but it'd just get another leak at some point, so what's the point?" No, you fix the leak. And when another leak pops up, you find a way to fix that leak and so and so forth.

^^This example applies if you feel that the Calipari is paying his players because he feels the system is broken and the players need payed. In other words he is looking out for the players.

It's as though several screws on your roof are leaking. Bad thing. So instead of fixing the leak, you decide to allow ALL of the screws to leak and just try to divert the water to where you think it should go. Problem solved? Sure. But you just made it VERY easy for the house to get damaged to the point of no return.

^^This example applies if you feel Calipari is cheating in order to get ahead.  He is paying players to get an unfair advantage in order to get the better players. In other words he is looking out for himself

Which one do you think it is?  I for one think it's option 2.  You think they are going to be wiling to play on an even playing field now just because all players are getting paid?  Not a chance, because the issue isn't with the rules, the problem lies at the hearts of those cheating. Cheaters are going to cheat. I'm not saying the rules couldn't use some adjusting, but lets do it for the right reason.  Do it to address any issues with student/athlete appreciation, not to address cheating. If you want to address cheating, the NCAA would need to start by enforcing the rules they already have, and if they did, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. 

[onebadrubi]

^^This example applies if you feel that the Calipari is paying his players because he feels the system is broken and the players need payed. In other words he is looking out for the players.

^^This example applies if you feel Calipari is cheating in order to get ahead.  He is paying players to get an unfair advantage in order to get the better players. In other words he is looking out for himself

Which one do you think it is?  I for one think it's option 2.  You think they are going to be wiling to play on an even playing field now just because all players are getting paid?  Not a chance, because the issue isn't with the rules, the problem lies at the hearts of those cheating. Cheaters are going to cheat. I'm not saying the rules couldn't use some adjusting, but lets do it for the right reason.  Do it to address any issues with student/athlete appreciation, not to address cheating. If you want to address cheating, the NCAA would need to start by enforcing the rules they already have, and if they did, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

Well said.  I'd add that I personally believe the NCAA has created loopholes or "outs" for many instances where they could enforce rules but did not because it harms revenue or programs/conferences that are known for large revenue. 

[East TN HAWG]

Correct, but that is because of Title 9 or whatever.  You can achieve similar baseball style system with full scholarships.

College baseball people always say if they had more scholarships they could get more of the kids to college that could not afford college, and end up deciding to go pro for maybe a 25,000 signing bonus or something.

Title 9 would affect pay for play as well.  If you start paying men's athletes, then you would have to pay the women dollar-for-dollar.  P5 schools could accommodate this, but others could not.  This would eliminate a lot of men's and women's scholarships for non revenue sports such as swimming and wrestling. 

The only way around it is through the use of agents, but then phony agencies will spring up to send quality college players to certain schools.  Guess what, we are in the same spot we started out again. 

[hogsanity]

Title 9 would affect pay for play as well.  If you start paying men's athletes, then you would have to pay the women dollar-for-dollar.  P5 schools could accommodate this, but others could not.  This would eliminate a lot of men's and women's scholarships for non revenue sports such as swimming and wrestling. 

The only way around it is through the use of agents, but then phony agencies will spring up to send quality college players to certain schools.  Guess what, we are in the same spot we started out again. 

Also, what if you only were going to pay men in certain sports? Are they going to pay golfers, swimmers, baseball players, etc?

[Supermark101]

I just disagree.  I say let the ones that want to go pro, go.  Force all the others to follow the baseball rules.  They are playing for a degree is the way I look at it.  I don't want to see the NCAA become a minor league system. 

Now, if you want to discuss where the profits go from the NCAA I am all for that.  Even for something along the lines of a bonus upon degree completion maybe.  I just do not want college athletics to leave the ultimate goal of an education behind.

Couldn't agree more. I really like the bonus idea.

It only benefits the schools, who are already getting over by raking in all this money and not sharing it with the students-athletes.

Most athletic departments run at a lose or zero profit. You knkw where thst money goes? To the student athlete or support staff.

Anyone that says a degree isn't enough payment never worked to pay for school. I say split the schools "profits," after every sport is paid for, to each athlete, then force them to pay there own tution, room, and board. She how long that lasts.if a athlete chooses not to take advantage of a free education, that is on them, not the school or NCAA

[rotaryDial]

Well said.  I'd add that I personally believe the NCAA has created loopholes or "outs" for many instances where they could enforce rules but did not because it harms revenue or programs/conferences that are known for large revenue.

100% agree, in an effort to keep the bank roll coming they have turned their heads in many cases and it has finally caught up to them.  I am not blaming the desire for coaches to cheat directly on the NCAA, but they definitely haven't helped themselves by allowing it to go on so long.  What started as a small pot whole has turned into a man eating sink whole. Now it will take drastic, and over due, measures to recover.