Like 80 current FBS teams are going to die when this happens.
Everything would change.
New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.
That's not necessarily true. There are a lot of teams that are in the red or break even on purpose. When you're a non-profit team that relies on donations and/or support from the state, you need to match your expenses to your revenue to keep the gravy train coming (see: waterfalls in locker rooms, renovated weight rooms every 5 years, etc). Some schools makes literally too much money to spend (OSU, Texas, etc), but almost every team could trim expenses if they had to - we have no idea how many would ACTUALLY be self sufficient if they needed to be.
, but almost every team could trim expenses if they had to.
Pure fantasy. Take a look at ECU. East Carolina has made cuts due to not having a competitive advantage of State support like other States who provide for their state school athletics. Move up a conference (fees), have a lunatic AD and admin that think sports support is dumb (See UAB as well) and then hire a coach who can't coach and piles up losses so attendance and donations plummet. Trimming the budget 2 years ago put them in a precarious position. Then a buy out of the AD and football coach as well as a losing program and you are operating in the red. It is a hole of monumental proportions. This school is a great fan based football school and just like other schools that would suffer from this decision it could spell a lot of trouble for title IX compliance and athletics in general. The best a non power 5 school could hope for is to have great teams and barely finish even at the end of the year.
Jim Harbaugh is to coaching what Lou Glutz is to Motor sales.
I don't think UAB is a good example. There was a whole bunch of dirty state politics that undermined UAB.
It is a perfect example as stated. Politics led to the morons in charge who wanted the program aborted.
When you're a non-profit team that relies on donations and/or support from the state
Thats part of the problem. Tax dollars are funding a lot of the universities and tax payers may take issue with where their money is going. The universities can use it to keep building buildngs they don’t need or paying athletes in an effort to try and keep up with the Joneses. Mark Cuban himself as an example donates to Indiana but has stipulations on how his money is used. He doesn’t want his money being used on building new buildings because he sees it as wasteful of funds.
Tuition will keep climbing and student debt will continue to sky rocket to help cover the costs and allow future expansion. Tax payers will be funding minor league sports instead of the university. Paying players is going to open up a huge can of worms and create a whole bunch of new problems. Conferences I imagine are going to change as well. D1 will shrink from colleges not able to survive in that environment.
This is the problem that allowing money to become so big in college athletics created.
“Megadeth >>> Metallica” - Alum 2019. I couldn’t agree more.
Uhhh have you seen Avengers? It can happen man.
It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.
Maybe those programs will still exist in another dimension...
Doesnt bode well for the Delany led B1G. Will increase the ACC and SEC no holds barred practices.
Now is the time. The top programs and any program that wants to keep playing in every conference outside of the SEC need to come together with some type of alliance and forge a new media deal with Fox and NBC ASAP. Let the SEC and ESPN do their own thing. Although the ACC would probably tag along with the SEC, at least their programs that would survive.
I think their claims of a "Wild West" are being overdramatic. The P5 leagues could all afford to pay players a small amount, so they'd probably just agree on a limit and the schools would all sign on. It would accelerate the divide between P5 > G5 >FCS though.
The P5 leagues could all afford to pay players a small amount, so they'd probably just agree on a limit and the schools would all sign on.
Who's going to regulate that? If the court rules against the NCAA, they will effectively be neutered so it won't be them. Also, when Title IX comes knocking and demanding that all athletes receive the same compensation at a particular school do you think the Middle and Lower tier schools will be able to handle that? Schools like OSU could flourish in a model like that, they are not the norm though.
It is too early to say, but I doubt the court orders a separate body to do it. They probably just go to the same bodies. That is what they do in other regulatory matters.
And it really depends on how it is handled. This is a major problem, as it stands some schools make millions or billions while the players get tuition. Some will go on but not others. How much they should get and everything else is something the court may or may not weigh in on.
It is too soon to assume that the court will do this or that. This seems like a way to get in front of a decission.
yeah the Big 12 will say $1200 a month and the SEC will say $100,000 a year and a new car.
If the P5 leagues did this individually, this would be OK; however, if the P% leagues did this together, you've got anti-trust issues (which is what the suit is about, the P5 leagues came together and said the compensation is $0.00).
Benwin bringin' The News today.
Lifetime vs. UM: L 8-1, C 7-0, T 4-0
*Sipping the Buckeye Kool-Aid since 1995
I have always been against the 'pay the players' side of the argument. I think there is a component to this that very few people have voiced their opinion about. If I had a high powered job (I don't, i'm a teacher) and got paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to be important I no longer really have to worry about money. If someone walked up to me after a meeting or presentation and said "good job, here's 500 bucks" there is no way I turn down that money. I think the same thing applies. If schools give out huge signing bonuses or weekly checks to their star players none of them are going to turn down more money no matter what. This then turns into who has the deepest pockets or best 'bag men.' While this is currently a problem, the best way to fix it isn't to just pay the players. That is just compounding the problem even more. While I don't have any idea if there is even a 'fix' to it, I really don't see this helping in any way, shape, or form.
I mean, that already happens today. Bag men are a real thing for the biggest and richest schools. And that includes us - I just don’t really care if a guy is getting $400 every once in a while.
I don't either, but paying the players isn't going to stop the issue. That's what I was trying to get at. It's just going to line the players pockets more than they already do.
Salary Caps, even professional sports have them.
Salry caps are OK if they are negotiated between a business and a union. This is why they survive anti-trust scrutiny. Salary caps are not OK if they are set by the business.
This then turns into who has the deepest pockets or best 'bag men.'
So you're saying there's a chance Michigan becomes successful?
"I've always preferred the barter system, anyway," quipped Commissioner Delany as he tended to his herd of goats.
Along with the money, school need to put their athletes through courses on financial planning and budgeting.
"Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed, is more important than any other one thing." - Abraham Lincoln
school need to put their athletes all their students through courses on financial planning and budgeting.
Preach. As someone just north of 30, I'm amazed at how many of my peers, even those established in their professional careers, are so careless and clueless about their own finances.
Lesson 1 - paying for everything on student loans to get a degree in dance history = terrible idea.
Lesson 2 - get a job.
Everything that happens-good and bad-should motivate you to be persistent. ~JT
school need to put their athletes all their students through courses on financial planning and budgeting.
I appreciate the irony in this post
I’m all in on this idea too, along with ditching the marketing opportunities given to creditors on-campus. Don’t get me started on the coercion that is university-student loan company relation.
UCF would be able to buy a championship.
Problem with paying players is title 9. Most athletic departments lose money because they have to offer a bunch of money-losing sports. Football subsidizes the rowing and golf teams.
AD's could easily have the money to pay football players if they nix other programs....problem is they can't.
Title IX is the reason why big schools need to tell the NCAA to go eff themselves and create their own league where they can pay their athletes and not adhere to the NCAA's antiquated rules.
There are problems with IRS and college agreement in amateurism. They can't make an exception for some scholarships and not others. Plus OSU has said firmly(I believe them) they will not pay athletes even if they have to not participate. It will become a bidding war and ruin athletics. Just let them go to pro when they can.
The NCAA did not originate Title IX - the Federal Government did. Compliance with Title IX has nothing to do with being a member of the NCAA.
Time to bring back NCAA Football
"We talkin' about practice?!" -Allen Iverson 2002
"Year for what?"
Amen - I haven't owned a gaming system since that entire thing blew up. NCAA was, and always will be, the BEST EVER.
Living the life! Go Buckeyes! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
CPO and CDR, USN (ret)
1942, 1954, 1957, 1961, 1968, 1970, 2002, 2014 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!
I miss that game so much. Although I'm not sure I could stomach listening to Herbie and Fowler on it nowadays.
Imagining Klatt and Gus...
The system now doesn't make sense, you have athletes who are sure fire professionals going thru the motions majoring in something that doesn't help them. I think its pretty arbitrary that football players at tOSU and Alabama, and basketball players at Duke for example have to pick majors and go to class. Instead of having a college athlete that will most likely play professionally major in something like Business and go thru all the motions, why aren't colleges preparing these kids for a life of a professional athlete. How to manage wealth, manage fame, taxes, etc. Colleges are factories for lawyers, doctors, accountants, so why not athletes? Can we admit that without the old proverbial "their students first"....yeah right, Nick Bosa is a "student first." Why kid yourself?
Isn’t the average NFL career like 4 years? Bama and OSU players may last longer, but either way they are lucky to make it to 10 years.
I don’t know how many college football players treat their degrees as their first priority, but I bet that at 35 just about every former college football player feels grateful to have been able to at least start their undergrad education, if not finish it.
Really how much is a undergrad degree really worth now-a-days? I have one, but my job which just requires "a bachelor's degree" does not care what I studied or what I learned. Just have a degree. Actually, trades are far more valuable today than a bachelor's, you can get a CDL and make way more money than you can with a bachelor's degree, don't get me started on what welders make. Let's not kid ourselves here, most NFL players who retire and get jobs elsewhere don't need a degree to do so, rather they get jobs based on their likeness. I'm pretty sure there are thousands of employers in the state of Ohio that would drool if Troy Smith came in and put in an app.
Welders and CDL drivers also spend a huge amount of time away from family and face way more dangerous situations than an accountant or salesperson etc..
Yeah I’d be psyched to meet Troy Smith. But that’s a former QB, Heisman winner, from Ohio State. Not many players have a likeness that is that valuable. I wouldn’t be that psyched to meet a retired 30-something Orhian Johnson. Would you?
Ask someone without a college degree how much one is worth? It unlocks a lot of doors, even if they seem ubiquitous these days. Options are limited as much as growth for those without a degree. Most of those jobs are manual labor, which is respectable, but not easy - especially when you start to age a little more. You can make a decent living with a skilled trade. You can make a better one with an degree.
Very few treat the NFL as first priority. The are about 1700 players in the NFL. That’s 1700 positions but they aren’t all available every year due to turnover. Guys like Brady, Rodgers, Brees, etc are taking up spots at the position. Figure you have about 24,000 college players between FBS and FCS with around half actually eligible any given year for the NFL. Those 12,000 players far outweigh the few hundred spots that might be available in the NFL. That isn’t even including past NFL players that are also fighting for those spots.
OHYO So what are they supposed to fall back on if they have a career ending injury during their rookie season al la Ki Jana Carter?
Well in his case a $7M signing bonus comes to mind. For anyone else that isn't so fortunate, they can go to college. Might have to pay for it like a few other people in this part of the first world, but so what?
If it is a big deal, let the player's union negotiate a $200K scholarship emergency reserve available to anyone who signs on and winds up making less than $X.
will ruin college football, even more than replay and the ESPN corruption has.
As far as my interest goes, this could be the death of my interest in college football.
I'd rather see no scholarships and true amatuerism than see professional sports run by universities based on one judges interpretation of anti-trust laws. But maybe the deal between NFL and colleges can't hold, and we may see underclassman under no obligation, like in basketball.
A college scholarship is a big financial deal. Stars can cash out then they leave.
However, if they wanted to provide better post-sports health care and insurance against injury, that would be great. And a living stipend something less than what rich kids get at elite schools from their parents would be perfectly moral as well.
My question is, couldn’t the NFL require it’s employees to have a college degree to be considered for a job? I apply for jobs all the time they don’t care what degree I have, they just require that I have a degree to meet minimum requirements.
They could, but what is their incentive?
couldn’t the NFL require it’s employees to have a college degree to be considered for a job?
I assume you're referring to players? If so, the Players Association would probably have all sorts of issues with such a requirement, and would end up with 2 different sets of standards: one for rookies and another for those already in the league. Ownership wouldn't like it since in all likelihood it would mean a multi-year virtual drought on new talent while they wait for rookies to earn their degrees.
Shandy is not beer
I'd like to point out that the NFL and the NBA are the ones screwing this up. No one bitches about college baseball players because they have a paid pro component from age 18. I think people need to put their frustration towards the pro organizations. With that being said at least the NBA is trying with the G league and the new higher payout system.
This will be a fascinating sorry to follow, there will absolutely be unintended consequences, some good and some bad.
By the NCAA's benchmark for self-sufficiency, just 24 of 230 public schools in Division I stand on their own, up from 20 a year earlier, according to an analysis of the 2013-14 school year by USA TODAY Sports, based on data gathered in conjunction with Indiana University's National Sports Journalism Center.
This number would be just 5 years ago. Keep having championships that exclude group of 5 schools and see what happens. Financially speaking, the gap between power 5 and group of 5 is widening to much for this decision to make sense for group of 5 schools to be part of the NCAA at all.
That's what I think this is leading to, schools leaving the NCAA. If they dont not all the programs can afford to pay their players. I think you would then see 50+ programs just shut down or elect to drop to FCS or D-III.
"You're the patron saint of the totally effed" - Hot Tub Time Machine
You would have the same problems though in just the B10. Teams like Northwestern, Purdue etc can't spend like Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State can..
If they want to pay these kids a fair wage and you set a standard wage for every player you're talking about maybe 30-35 programs that could do that. You've got a lot of programs in power 5 conferences that don't have deep pockets like a few teams at the top of the conference do..
Should be interesting..
There's "paid" market value and "paid" what EVERY school can afford. Have to imagine this would be the every school model. Step in the right direction....
Start a new division (conference) with schools that want to pay their players.
If this gets approved, it will only be a matter of time before High School players start wanting/getting paid.
"When you're part of a team, you stand up for your teammates. Your loyalty is to them. You protect them through good and bad, because they'd do the same for you." Yogi Berra
You can't be serious...
Yes, I am serious. Just a few years ago we would have thought the same thing about paying a stipend for college players, now it is the norm. High School Football make a lot of money too, not college money, but the bigger schools can have stadiums worth millions of dollars (I saw one that cost 60m in Texas), and endorsements from shoe companies for hundreds of thousands or more, plus gate money and apparel of course too. Yes, sounds silly, really silly, but I think the same thing about college sports.
Even at OSU, Clemson, and Bama, only about 40% of the football players are going to make an NFL roster. I be they all think they will, but that’s not reality. You can’t approach this problem with the view that most college players are going to make millions some day. That’s not even close to reality. Not very many of them are being held back from anything, especially when you consider that there is a lot of physical training, nutrition, coaching, and practicing to be invested by the schools before even the most talented athlete is ready to join an NFL team. That’s a tangent, but an important one when discussing compensation.
One other angle I’ve not seen mentioned is that the directive set forth by Title IX is a legal one, not an NCAA rule. That means it doesn’t matter to which conference or other association a school does or does not belong. All colleges and universities at every level will be effected by the outcome of the legal case in question, and all student athletes as well. It certainly has the potential to transform collegiate athletics as we know it. It could be devastating for most. A lot of sports could be dropped, and a lot of opportunities lost, in addition to shifting the power dramatically toward the the top.
But that fact allows you to argue both way:
1) they're not going to make it in the NFL, so you you should pay them now, because there was no value gained by a pro audition in the college ranks
2) they're not going to make it in the NFL, so the value gained in college IS the college degree/education
I have gone back and forth on this issue over the last couple years and have come a conclusion that the current model is broken. (yeah no duh)
But my take may be slightly different than the archane notions of anti-trust and if players are "employees" as the NW guys tried to do a couple years ago.
Mine has more to do with the health risks players face in college football vs the handful of men who reap millions off them taking that risk.
And I am looking straight at guys like Meyer, Day and Gene Smith among many of their compatriots in the field
Last year in what turned out to be e futile bid to make the playoffs, our starting QB (JT) rushed back from an injury in the UM game to lead the team against Wisky in the B10 title game.
I applaud JT for his toughness and courage but to not pay him while the coaches who put him back on the field make millions, to me is indefensible
OSU's coaching staff this past year not counting all the side benefits, endorsement deals, extra game tickets etc, but just pay compensation made (including what would have been Z Smith's salary), was nearly $20 million. That does not include the strength coach who makes over 500K, or the support staff, trainers etc,,just the HC and his 9 assistants make essentially $20 million off the free labor of players literally risking life and limb to play a game
That is genuinely about as unfair a system as you could construct.
Woody Hayes in 1951 made 12,500, in today's dollars that a little over 100K, Haden Fry as late as 1978 was hired by Iowa for 40K again a little over 150K in today's, Bo up north in 1969 would have equaled about $150K now,,,but his former player now makes $9 million.
So they have enough money for guys like Urban and Harbaugh to become insanely wealthy and even for schools like Akron to build multi-million dollar facilities, but claim poverty when it come to paying players
A 10% pay cut to just OSU's football coaches would free up $2 million to pay each of the 85 scholarship players over 20K a year
A 10% cut in the entire athletic budget would free up over $10 million dollars or more and allow them to pay all 980 SA's across all sports $1,000 per month year round
10% MEASLY percent. Poor Urban would only make 6.3 million instead of 7, and Day would have made 900K instead of $1 million
If Akron had not spent over $60 Million on a new football field when they still had the Rubber bowl to play in, that would have freed up enough money to pay everyone of their 450 SA's over 30K per year for their entire 4 year stays
There is no reason why a football player who busts his tail just as hard at Ball St as the kid at OSU does and risks the same life altering injuries should get paid nothing for it, when his coach who demands that level of effort and risk makes 8 times the average americans salary and goes 2-8 against his fellow FBS opponents drawing less than 6K for the season close
Blow it up, hire the players and employees, drop the student charade and be done with it already.
I've believed for a long time that NCAA athletes, particularly football players, should be compensated via a stipend, sort of like how graduate students are. Nothing extravagant, but enough that you don't get cases like Jameis Winston stealing from Publix because he couldn't afford crab legs. Most of the old rules regarding recruiting would still apply, and so that the richer schools don't have an unfair advantage the NCAA institutes a cap on stipends and keeps it illegal to compensate students in any way outside of their scholarships and stipends.
It's true that a lot of schools might shut down their athletics with such a rule, but I'll maintain that some schools shouldn't have athletics if they can't support them properly, especially if they can only support them by siphoning money that might otherwise go to more worthier endeavors like research, teacher compensation (I admit, I'm biased here), and infrastructure.
"porque las estirpes condenadas a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad sobre la tierra."
siphoning money that might otherwise go to more worthier endeavors like research, teacher compensation (I admit, I'm biased here), and infrastructure.
As well as lowering the cost of education. I don’t want my tax dollars going to fund buildings and such that aren’t needed and paying student athletes on top of the free ride they are already receiving. Though I do agree on a living stipend as you mention like a GA. I take no issue with taxes being used there.
What I don’t want is taxes being used for their expansion to keep up with the Joneses. Meanwhile you battle inflation and the rising costs of education from their expansion, while trying to save for your own kids to attend college in hopes they can walk away with little to no debt. It’s going to be an interesting battle that state and local governments will have to get involved with.
I am really conflicted about this. In part because coaches today can make soooo much money to run these programs, which clearly says (right or wrong) that a lot of value is placed on these sport teams. So for me, I know the players should get paid. I think the fairly new total enrollment aid approach is good, but once you get the employee label the money for players may get out of hand.
However, at the end of the day I can't have too much sympathy for the NCAA because without question they did this to themselves.
The main downfall to all of this expansion talk is that ttun may actually have a shot some years at being considered for the 8th spot.. then we'd hear they're back all year long minus one week and a few after for mourning purposes.
There is a major collision coming in the mash-up involving NCAA, power conferences, "fairness," Title IX, market forces, anti-trust laws, labor laws. Without the federal government willing to make changes to laws that affect college football/basketball from at least 3 different directions, I don't really see how it gets sorted. And the federal government doesn't seem capable to get its act together on ANYTHING.
Title IX would not like the results of this at larger schools. It would end up being the non-revenue sports suffering the consequences at the Major Universities. There would be no way TOSU would be able to continue to support the mountain of sports it currently does and still turn a profit.
Buckeye til I die
I love Ohio State football, but the money invested in athletics in this country is waaaaaaay too high, this will ONLY make the monetary investment go up.
Granted, most of the money ends up in a precious few coffers, but if you think this will change that...all I have to say is be careful what you wish for...
Whoso would be a man, must be a non-conformist.