Could the Athletic Department afford to pay every athlete 10 grand a year?

[ARtillahog]

Did the university make millions off of your abilities while you were there?

My question is why aren't walk-ons in this discussion?  They account for 29.16% of the team and no successful college program (FB) can do without them.  They are the ones getting royally screwed.

[ricepig]

My question is why aren't walk-ons in this discussion?  They account for 29.16% of the team and no successful college program (FB) can do without them.  They are the ones getting royally screwed.

Under the new rules they are able to eat at the training table full time, now. If all schools provide some "money", some may take scholarships at lesser schools.

[Smokehouse]

Did the university make millions off of your abilities while you were there?

Since the vast majority of schools are in the red regarding athletics, this is really a moot point.

[The Hogfather]

Since the vast majority of schools are in the red regarding athletics, this is really a moot point.

It also ignores the fact that many of those millions go right back into the program (to build better facilities, get better coaches, better tutors, better equipment, better food, etc.).

[Dark Helmet Hog]

I wouldn't care if athletic scholarships were completely done away with altogether.

[hogsanity]

There are so many issues that this brings up, I don't see how to reconcile them:

1. Will this apply evenly to all athletes? Football brings in the overwhelming majority of sports revenues, so are we going to give college tennis players $10,000 each as well

2. If the answer to #1 is Yes, then will that lead to schools dropping fring sports, or at least stopping the offering of scholarships in those sports?

3. If the answer to #2 is Yes, then doesn't paying players end up hurting athletes, as a whole, just because a very few can't wait 3 or 4 years to "cash in"?

4. How would it affect a sport like baseball, where most players are on partial scholarship?

5. What about title 9 impacts. If schools start dropping sports, or stop giving scholarships in some, it is likely we would see a dramatic increase in title 9 claims.

6. On the flip side, why pay the 3rd string deep snapper the same as the star Qb? The argument now is that those most responsible for bringing in the most, the stars, want to be able to cash in now.  How does it remedy that, when those players could make six figures or more in endorsement deals, to give an equal amount to everyone.

[HF#1]

Money will be the demise of college football and college athletics in general.

[hogsanity]

Money will be the demise of college football and college athletics in general.

and people have been saying that for over 100 years as well.

I wish there was a minor league for football, so that those players only using college to be better football players could just go to the minors, get paid, and be done with it.  Sure, the college product might not be as good, but it would get rid of a lot of the problems going on right now.

[HF#1]

and people have been saying that for over 100 years as well.

I wish there was a minor league for football, so that those players only using college to be better football players could just go to the minors, get paid, and be done with it.  Sure, the college product might not be as good, but it would get rid of a lot of the problems going on right now.

Not really.  We haven't seen the kind of money that is injected into College Football in the past.  In the south, it's bigger than the NFL.  In the south, Mike Slive has every bit the pull that Roger Goodell does. 

Start paying players "stipends" it will only get worse.  It will be out of control.  There will be no way to level the playing field or control it.  It will be chaos.

[hogsanity]

Not really.  We haven't seen the kind of money that is injected into College Football in the past.  In the south, it's bigger than the NFL.  In the south, Mike Slive has every bit the pull that Roger Goodell does. 

Start paying players "stipends" it will only get worse.  It will be out of control.  There will be no way to level the playing field or control it.  It will be chaos.

I agree about paying them while they are in college. Very bad idea, and will end in nothing good. 

[Russ22]

Texas AD just announced that is what they intend to do. College sports has we have known it is over.




http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college-sports/headlines/20141021-texas-athletic-director-with-new-rules-longhorns-will-pay-each-player-10000.ece

I guess Texas thinks autonomy is each university making its own decisions. That's NOT what the NCAA meant or will allow. The P5 conferences will govern themselves with respect to this stuff. That means all the members will coordinate on issues like this. This is just the 1st round on this and Texas will put in their place shortly (I think).

This is about Charlie Strong losing on the recruiting trail and the 'horns AD is attempting to help him out before National Signing Day.

[Atlhogfan1]

This solves very little.

I wouldn't care if athletic scholarships were completely done away with altogether.

I've been saying this for years.  Also, make athletes meet the same academic standards as all students admitted to the university.  If they want a scholarship, meet the academic scholarship requirements. 

[007 License To Squeal]

I suspect fans could anticipate a GIGANTIC increase in ticket prices, parking, and probably a general athletic fee for ALL students.  This is a nightmare for everyone, IMHO.

[Fatty McGee]

If you include all sports - 450 student-athletes at $10,000....isn't that $4.5 million a year?  Texas can afford it - and we probably could, too.  But there's only about 20-30 schools in the country that could come up with that kind of money over and above what they're already paying just to keep up....it's an understatement to say they are stretched thin.  How would that even work?

There's only about 30 schools that truly play for a title anyway, and in the era of $5M head coaches, are we really arguing that the schools don't have enough money for the players we come to watch?  Heck, Charlie Weis gets $4.6M this year for NOT COACHING!

[Fatty McGee]

Not really.  We haven't seen the kind of money that is injected into College Football in the past.  In the south, it's bigger than the NFL.  In the south, Mike Slive has every bit the pull that Roger Goodell does. 

Start paying players "stipends" it will only get worse.  It will be out of control.  There will be no way to level the playing field or control it.  It will be chaos.

Yes, because we're not at chaos levels already.  Miami, OK State, etc. 

[Fatty McGee]

All this stems from the "give me mine" attitude.

a/k/a capitalism.

[hogsanity]

a/k/a capitalism.

Fine, do away with athletic scholarships and let them try to afford school just like everyone else.  IF they can do so by signing endorsement deals, or getting paid for autographs, great.  If they can hold down a job while also going to class ( except at UNC of course ) and doing all their sports work, that is fine too.

[Fatty McGee]

Fine, do away with athletic scholarships and let them try to afford school just like everyone else.  IF they can do so by signing endorsement deals, or getting paid for autographs, great.  If they can hold down a job while also going to class ( except at UNC of course ) and doing all their sports work, that is fine too.

Why would you do away with scholarships?  Why would you not want that to be part of the package a school can offer?  After all, that's extremely cheap for the school when you look at what it actually costs them to provide it. 

Before you tell me what a scholarship is "worth" by citing tuition costs, note that I'm not talking about that.  I'm talking about the cost to the school to provide it, which is discussed in detail here: http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-athletic-departments-and-the-media-fudge-the-cost-1570827027

[hogsanity]

Why would you do away with scholarships?  Why would you not want that to be part of the package a school can offer?  After all, that's extremely cheap for the school when you look at what it actually costs them to provide it. 

Before you tell me what a scholarship is "worth" by citing tuition costs, note that I'm not talking about that.  I'm talking about the cost to the school to provide it, which is discussed in detail here: http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-athletic-departments-and-the-media-fudge-the-cost-1570827027

You said the "give me mine" attitude is just capitalism. Well, I say they are already getting theirs in the form of that scholarship. How many d1 college football/basketball players ( since they are the ones doing most of the poor mouthing ) could PAY to go to the schools they do? So, if they do not think a scholarship is " getting theirs" let them try to get theirs like everyone else, either through academic award, traditional financial aid, or getting jobs to play for their tuition/room/board/food/clothes etc.  If that is in the form of endorsements, great.

[GS99]

If you add up everything directly and indirectly related to recruiting (e.g., the new football facility was pitched as being primarily for recruiting), it comes out to well over $100k per recruit.  $10k per year per football player, less than a million per year, is not that significant compared to everything else.

[Fatty McGee]

You said the "give me mine" attitude is just capitalism. Well, I say they are already getting theirs in the form of that scholarship. How many d1 college football/basketball players ( since they are the ones doing most of the poor mouthing ) could PAY to go to the schools they do? So, if they do not think a scholarship is " getting theirs" let them try to get theirs like everyone else, either through academic award, traditional financial aid, or getting jobs to play for their tuition/room/board/food/clothes etc.  If that is in the form of endorsements, great.

You realize this is TEXAS' idea, right?  This particular scheme didn't come from the players.  And in a way, Texas is smart in starting out here.  It's great marketing, which is what college athletics is anyway. 

That said, it looks like the players are going to be able to "get theirs" in whatever way they and the schools want to negotiate.  Which is also capitalist. 

[hogsanity]

If you add up everything directly and indirectly related to recruiting (e.g., the new football facility was pitched as being primarily for recruiting), it comes out to well over $100k per recruit.  $10k per year per football player, less than a million per year, is not that significant compared to everything else.

But we are talking 10K per year for EVERY STUDENT ATHLETE, not just football. This includes soccer, golf, tennis, gymnastics, volleyball, track and field, basketball, softball, baseball, etc.

[Fatty McGee]

But we are talking 10K per year for EVERY STUDENT ATHLETE, not just football. This includes soccer, golf, tennis, gymnastics, volleyball, track and field, basketball, softball, baseball, etc.

Again, we pay millions to guys to NOT COACH.  This "we don't have the money" cry falls flat.

[hogsanity]

Again, we pay millions to guys to NOT COACH.  This "we don't have the money" cry falls flat.

Where did I say the school or the athletic dept do not have the money?

[Fatty McGee]

Where did I say the school or the athletic dept do not have the money?

Oh, my bad.  What was the point of the "We have to pay EVERY ATHLETE" response then?  Just informational?

[hogsanity]

Oh, my bad.  What was the point of the "We have to pay EVERY ATHLETE" response then?  Just informational?

The post I replied to was talking about paying $10 just to football players. So was just making sure they knew it was all student athletes. the UofA can handle paying them all $10k, I do not think that is an issue for about 30 schools. After that it gets tougher, and when you get to the bottom half of FBS I would say it would be darn near impossible.

[Fatty McGee]

The post I replied to was talking about paying $10 just to football players. So was just making sure they knew it was all student athletes. the UofA can handle paying them all $10k, I do not think that is an issue for about 30 schools. After that it gets tougher, and when you get to the bottom half of FBS I would say it would be darn near impossible.

It's not impossible.  After all they are only in the FBS for marketing purposes anyway.  Looking at their athletic budgets alone doesn't make sense as far as assessing whether they can do it. 

[rljjr]

I guess Texas figures that's cheaper than buying officials?

[hogsanity]

It's not impossible.  After all they are only in the FBS for marketing purposes anyway.  Looking at their athletic budgets alone doesn't make sense as far as assessing whether they can do it. 

HEy, if it would cull the wannabees out of fbs, I would be fine with that too. The problem is, if EVERY school is paying ( be it 2k 5k or 10k, just everyone paying the same ) it does not improve the product at San Jose St or Buffalo. Now, if it became a truly free market, then that would be different. If the #1 hotshot Hs Qb could sell his services to the highest bidder, now you have changed the dynamic of the entire system.

[arlhog]

Aren't scholarship players already getting thousands of $$ in education, boarding, etc??

Yes they are.   But here's the question.   Would you play for the education,  or would you play for the education plus 10 grand?   Because you know if it's a good player, he's worth a lot more than an education plus 10 grand and someone will pay it.

[Fatty McGee]

HEy, if it would cull the wannabees out of fbs, I would be fine with that too. The problem is, if EVERY school is paying ( be it 2k 5k or 10k, just everyone paying the same ) it does not improve the product at San Jose St or Buffalo. Now, if it became a truly free market, then that would be different. If the #1 hotshot Hs Qb could sell his services to the highest bidder, now you have changed the dynamic of the entire system.

Of course it doesn't improve their product, that's not why they're playing.  They know they'll never get a shot to win a title.  Ever.  And those that do have the shot don't want them to have that shot.  Ever.  They like the dynamics of the system.

[NaturalStateReb]

Anyone know how many student athletes we have? I've got to think if we're talking less than $5 million annually, Long and company will find the money.

$5 million is where the bidding starts, not where it ends.

We're watching the beginning of letting the lawyers destroy college football.  Guess it was just a matter of time, since the legal professional has basically done something similar to every other American institution.

[Fatty McGee]

$5 million is where the bidding starts, not where it ends.

We're watching the beginning of letting the lawyers destroy college football.  Guess it was just a matter of time, since the legal professional has basically done something similar to every other American institution.

So we might pay all the players combined slightly more than we pay one guy to coach? 

The endless pursuit of the dollar by literally everyone else involved BUT the players until now has nothing to do with destroying college sports. 

[NaturalStateReb]

So we might pay all the players combined slightly more than we pay one guy to coach? 

The endless pursuit of the dollar by literally everyone else involved BUT the players until now has nothing to do with destroying college sports. 

Whatever, Atticus Finch.

[Fatty McGee]

Whatever, Atticus Finch.

Nice work. 

[NaturalStateReb]

Nice work. 

I always try to bring my A game. 

My Atticus Finch game. 

[Theolesnort]

Fatty as a well educated man you rattle way to much on something you take a side on without using your imagination or intellect to even see what this might very well lead to or consider the possibility of the negative side that could very well crop up. You are all in on something without any attempt to balance out the consequences of what this may all lead to. You remind me of a ostrich that sticks his head in the sand and ignores danger all around him all the while feeling all is well. Lawyers as politicians do this all the time knowing full well they may well be screwing something up thinking they can pass more laws in the future to lesson the bad consequences.... and then the beat goes on and we have the mess that we see today instead of trying the simple and direct route. This is short minded thinking.

[Fatty McGee]

Fatty as a well educated man you rattle way to much on something you take a side on without using your imagination or intellect to even see what this might very well lead to or consider the possibility of the negative side that could very well crop up. You are all in on something without any attempt to balance out the consequences of what this may all lead to. You remind me of a ostrich that sticks his head in the sand and ignores danger all around him all the while feeling all is well. Lawyers as politicians do this all the time knowing full well they may well be screwing something up thinking they can pass more laws in the future lesson the bad.... and then the beat goes on and we have the mess that we see today instead of trying the simple and direct route. This is short minded thinking.

The mess we have today is because every other player in this system got too greedy.  We abandoned tradition (OU-Nebraska, for example), the educational mission, etc. in the pursuit of more money.   

All has not been well for decades.  You know how much Jack Crowe was being paid when he was fired?  Just shy of $200,000.  Bret Bielema is making many, many multiples of that.  Now, don't misunderstand, I don't begrudge him that - he is simply taking what the system is giving.  Let's not pretend he's being paid for results, though - he's being paid on potential (Again, I'm not criticizing the work he's done). 

Do you know how much the director of the Orange Bowl gets paid?  Just shy of $500,000, not to mention various perks.  For putting on ONE GAME.  One. 

And you're telling me that because the talent might get paid that I'm not seeing what's going on?  Really?  I could have told you when the first conference championship game was set up that we'd end up here.  Why?  Because that had nothing to do with determining the "champion".  It had to do with money, that's all.  The SEC quite rightly saw a ratings bonanza.  There are over a hundred teams playing FBS football, of which maybe (MAYBE) a rotating cast of 40 have a true shot at a title.  Why are those others doing it then?  (Three guesses, first two don't count)

And now we're in an era where the most profitable thing on television is live sports.  You can't really DVR it, it's the only true must watch NOW thing on, and it's only getting more valuable.

So where you say I have my head in the sand, I respond that this was the inevitable result of leaving the educational mission behind in pursuit of the dollar.  You know what FSU football average graduation rate is?  58%.  Ever heard a fan or an AD or a television exec or bowl exec call out a coach for that stat?  Want him canned for that?

This is the era of the Miami scandal, the OK State scandal, and whatever the latest of the week is, which no one moves to stop or punish on the coaches/AD side, yet we have players getting punished for selling an autograph.  While coaches and ADs and bowl execs make millions without penalty, and some are actually rewarded despite monumental failure (Charlie Weis, anyone) or sustained mediocrity (HDN, anyone).  And the defenders of this wonderful system that we complain we're going to lose if players get any more than an annual scholarship use some essentially socialist theory of "the good of all" but only when it comes to the players - you defenders of this system are essentially defending anti-capitalism.  Meanwhile they all, nonprofit institutions from the schools to the bowls, compete mercilessly for more dollars, casting college football tradition and ethics and most importantly education aside in its pursuit. 

You didn't see all that happening these last 20 years and think "hey, the people I pay to see might actually want to get something out of this one day"?  Really?   I'm the one with my head in the sand?  NOW, decades later, is when you get fussy about the potential consequences?   Because the talent might get to come outside into this rain of dollars and enjoy some?  So do I say at this point "let the chips fall where they may?"  Sure, because I can't see why now is this huge tipping point.  After all, if there's one thing that we can be for sure will happen, it's that the colleges will figure out a way to keep the gravy train going.  A little less money may go into facilities, or assistant coaches, and a little more go to the players, but they'll keep this system afloat.  Too much is made off of it to kill it off.

As Sonny Vaccaro put it to the Knight Commission:

""Why," asked Bryce Jordan, the president emeritus of Penn State, "should a university be an advertising medium for your industry?"

Vaccaro did not blink. "They shouldn't, sir," he replied. "You sold your souls, and you're going to continue selling them. You can be very moral and righteous in asking me that question, sir," Vaccaro added with irrepressible good cheer, "but there's not one of you in this room that's going to turn down any of our money. You're going to take it. I can only offer it.""

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/


So you look at all that and say "Why won't he choose the simple and direct route"?  Tell me, what is the "simple and direct" route we should try? 

PS - most politicians aren't lawyers, or just have the degree.  And I'm not that educated.   

[hogsanity]

We have two different conversations going on here:

1. Could the UA afford the model Texas threw out there this week?  Yes they could.

2.  Is paying athletes going to "fix" anything? No. If everyone gets an equal amount, there will still be pressure to do things under the table to attract top recruits, who think ( and maybe rightly so ) that they are worth more than the regular joes on the team. And, if teams are allowed to play players differing amounts, they answer is still no, because that would basically mean bidding wars for top recruits in football, but nothing for just about anyone in any other sport. Throw title IX obligations on top of all that, and paying players is only good for one thing. It MIGHT keep the NCAA and individual leagues and schools out of court, but even that is doubtful.

[Fatty McGee]

And, if teams are allowed to play players differing amounts, they answer is still no, because that would basically mean bidding wars for top recruits in football, but nothing for just about anyone in any other sport.

We have those bidding wars now, it's just that we bid on everything but the players in the major sports.  Look at the facilities races and the coach's pay.  That's where we bid to attract players instead of paying them directly.  The rest of the sports get a small fraction of the two major ones anyway.

[thirrdegreetusker]

Before you tell me what a scholarship is "worth" by citing tuition costs, note that I'm not talking about that.  I'm talking about the cost to the school to provide it, which is discussed in detail here: http://regressing.deadspin.com/how-athletic-departments-and-the-media-fudge-the-cost-1570827027

Very interesting article. I have thought, for along time, that once a school gets as big as UA, the cost of one more scholarship athlete could be considered to be ZERO.

Think about it. Is the overall UA electric bill, water bill, or grocery bill going to noticeably increase with one more student? I think that many factors, including the price fluctuations in our economy, might easily have more effect, on the bottom line, than the addition of one student.

Think about it. At the buffet at Golden Corral, do costs really, measurably, go UP if 152 people eat the lunch buffet, instead of 151? No. Revenue is different, therefore profit, but costs remain the same.

[Theolesnort]

Fatty you just took another wrong to justify something else wrong when you mentioned the big salaries. What about CE'O's in the big corporations today? Sure they do earn income for great ideas and strategies all the while the income in the last decade for the people that implement the work goes down. Things are out of whack but what is the best way to bring things back in balance? Don't get me wrong the last thing in the world I am is a liberal or a Socialist which will not work but you would think that balance in our current system could be adjusted to work a little better would you not think? The problem with that kind of thinking is it would have to be done properly with a lot of forethought without upsetting the good that we now have. That is the problem we have now in college athletics how do you fix it without causing all kinds of collateral damage. Something to think about.

[hogsanity]

Fatty you just took another wrong to justify something else wrong when you mentioned the big salaries. What about CE'O's in the big corporations today? Sure they do earn income for great ideas and strategies all the while the income in the last decade for the people that implement the work goes down. Things are out of whack but what is the best way to bring things back in balance? Don't get me wrong the last thing in the world I am is a liberal or a Socialist which will not work but you would think that balance in our current system could be adjusted to work a little better would you not think? The problem with that kind of thinking is it would have to be done properly with a lot of forethought without upsetting the good that we now have. That is the problem we have now in college athletics how do you fix it without causing all kinds of collateral damage. Something to think about.

I still think at some point the college football bubble will burst.

[Theolesnort]

I still think at some point the college football bubble will burst.

Something will bust. Fatty says that the big sports are getting the money even now but he fails to use a little empathy and put himself into the shoes of someone who is on scholarship in one of the minor sports right now. Think how they will feel when their sport is dropped to save even more monies for the revenue producing sports. The common reaction to that is well it needed to be dropped because they don't produce any revenue. Well neither do women's sports but Title Nine protects them where the men's non revenue producing sports programs will not be. Walk a mile in one of those guys shoes for a while and see how they hope well enough is left alone for now.

[HF#1]

When they start paying college football players, I'll move down to the lower divisions and high school level. Find a new team to support religiously like Arkansas Tech or Henderson State or my High School Alma Mater. At least I can afford to go to those games.

The Razorbacks would become a casual glance to the news to see what they are doing.   

[arlhog]

You will lose more than 5 million if you don't pay them.  So you have to pay them.   Watch your athletic department go down the toilet if other schools pay and you don't.

[bennyl08]

I dint read either

PRJ

[LZH]

But what happens when the biggest of the big boys, the Alabamas, LSUs, Notre Dames, Floridas, go to 25K a year?  Just because we can afford it now, doesn't mean that 10 years down the road, that this is a good thing for us.

Good point.  We'll be able to hang in there with the best of 'em, for a while.  I'd think when it comes to money, we're near the top of that second tier...which would keep us in the thick of things for a good while.

I think the head honchos at the NCAA get in their own way more often than not, but they aren't stupid.  I'm sure all of this has been hashed out and re-hashed and re-re-hashed.

[Dark Helmet Hog]

The second athletes are officially paid, college football is officially over and done. At that point Universities might as well go ahead and affiliate with NFL teams to help pay the subsidies to the athletes since they will be basically a farm system anyway.

What is getting lost here is the fact that these are COLLEGE teams and the athletes are supposed to be STUDENT athletes. It is almost, if not already, to the point where the only real solution to restore balance will be to eliminate athletic scholarships in their entirety and establish an NFL farm system. There are many athletes that really don't have the academics to be in school anyway.

This situation is way past ridiculous. It is not sustainable on the path it is traveling at this time.

[Smokehouse]

I still think at some point the college football bubble will burst.

Everything does at some point. Most likely culprit right now is concussions causing the football bubble to burst on both ends; NFL becomes less popular, parents of young kids become less willing to let their children start football.

NBA is trending up lately, MLS got a little traction from the world cup and could keep it going, especially if the rumored switch of the 2022 World Cup to the U.S. happens coupled with another strong showing in Russia in 2018.