lengthy article in the DNJ:

Is it time to pay them?

and another related article:

McPhee: University 'here to educate'

(07-24-2011 09:38 AM)SpaceRaider Wrote:  lengthy article in the DNJ:

Is it time to pay them?

and another related article:

McPhee: University 'here to educate'

Here's my problem. Paying is being touted as the solution to cheating and I just don't see it.

Paying enrolled players doesn't do a single thing to stop the offers of payment to high school players to get them to enroll.

The amount of payment being considered still isn't going to allow for many tattoos in Columbus or driving a brand new car.

I can see some positives in paying but the writers touting it as the cure for cheating are living in a fantasy world.

(07-25-2011 01:10 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-24-2011 09:38 AM)SpaceRaider Wrote:  lengthy article in the DNJ:

Is it time to pay them?

and another related article:

McPhee: University 'here to educate'

Here's my problem. Paying is being touted as the solution to cheating and I just don't see it.

Paying enrolled players doesn't do a single thing to stop the offers of payment to high school players to get them to enroll.

The amount of payment being considered still isn't going to allow for many tattoos in Columbus or driving a brand new car.

I can see some positives in paying but the writers touting it as the cure for cheating are living in a fantasy world.

True dat. If paying players were enough to keep them financially satisfied, there would be no players in the NFL seeking endorsement deals, right?

(07-24-2011 09:38 AM)SpaceRaider Wrote:  lengthy article in the DNJ:

Is it time to pay them?

and another related article:

McPhee: University 'here to educate'

NO.

(07-25-2011 01:10 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-24-2011 09:38 AM)SpaceRaider Wrote:  lengthy article in the DNJ:

Is it time to pay them?

and another related article:

McPhee: University 'here to educate'

Here's my problem. Paying is being touted as the solution to cheating and I just don't see it.

Paying enrolled players doesn't do a single thing to stop the offers of payment to high school players to get them to enroll.

The amount of payment being considered still isn't going to allow for many tattoos in Columbus or driving a brand new car.

I can see some positives in paying but the writers touting it as the cure for cheating are living in a fantasy world.

This is just another opportunity to seperate the TOP BCS conferences from the rest of FBS conferences. This is about legalizing what is already taking place on the campuses of the top BCS programs in the country.

interesting column in Orlando Sentinel, excerpt:

Quote:...It started last week with Southeastern Conference Commissioner Mike Slive's "Agenda for Change" speech at SEC Media Days and continued here Sunday at the Atlantic Coast Conference Football Kickoff when ACC Commissioner John Swofford let it be known that big-time college athletics is at a "crossroads" and a "tipping point" and that "significant changes" must be made.

Give Slive and Swofford credit. These guys are not only brilliant administrators; they are master magicians. They have somehow managed to create the illusion of reform amid the reality of scandal. They have managed to divert our collective attention from the major NCAA infractions cases in their own leagues (Auburn, LSU and Tennessee in the SEC; Georgia Tech and North Carolina in the ACC) with a couple of eloquent and emotional speeches in front of the gathered media at their preseason press powwows.

Not only that, but they have also effectively figured out a way of cutting the UCFs and the Boise States of the world out of a college football postseason that will some day be worth billions. And here's the best part of all: They are doing it in the name of integrity and what is best for the student-athlete. Who can argue with that?

I'm starting to think there was some sort of meeting at a sports bar over the scandal-scarred offseason where the commissioners of the six major conferences came together, ordered beers and had the following discussion:

"OK, how can we make the media and fans stop talking about Jim Tressel, Cam Newton and Reggie Bush? How can we get ESPN to stop doing Outside the Lines segments on the investigations and/or violations and/or probations at Oregon, Auburn, LSU, USC, Tennessee, Ohio State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, ad nauseam? And, at the same time, how can we silence the critics who say we're making billions and the players are making nothing? And, finally, how can we get Congress off our backs about us being an illegal cartel and locking out the non-BCS schools from playing for the national championship?"

And then all at once, they clinked their beer mugs together and screamed simultaneously: "REFORM!"

Don't get me wrong, I love some of the ideas Slive and Swofford are presenting - higher academic standards, multi-year scholarships for athletes, etc. - but I'm just a little cynical about timing and motive. Are they self-flogging themselves about the corruption in college athletics because it's the right thing to do or because it's the smart thing to do?

Could it be the BCS leagues are moving toward forming a separate division altogether - a division where all student-athletes from football to women's lacrosse receive multi-year scholarships, full-cost scholarships (aka., spending cash on top of books, tuition, room and board) and other costly perks and privileges?

The SEC and ACC, with their billion-dollar TV contracts, can afford to essentially pay their athletes above and beyond the cost of going to school. But schools like UCF, FAU and other non-BCS schools cannot.

"We recognize that this proposal may be a financial hardship on some, yet at the same time economics cannot always be the reason to avoid doing what is in the best interest of our student-athletes," Slive said.

Translation: If you can't pay, you don't play.

Swofford insists that creating a separate division for BCS leagues is not the intended result of these reform ideas, but he admits "it may" indeed come to that. It's no secret, Swofford says, that Division I-A football and basketball have programs that simply don't live in the same neighborhood or shop at the same stores.

"You have programs with $5 million budgets and programs with $130 million budgets," he says. "… That's the real challenge, trying to find a way of keeping the structure of the NCAA together as it currently is."

.....

It isn't like they aren't reaping some of the benefits . . . nicer locker rooms, less bus rides . . . they are living well for college kids. Why do they deserve any more than they are getting? And if they do - they shouldn't get a DIME until they get their degree!

I would like to see the NBA put together an insurance program that would benefit players who are injured in college, who could have gone pro.

(07-25-2011 01:10 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(07-24-2011 09:38 AM)SpaceRaider Wrote:  lengthy article in the DNJ:
Is it time to pay them?
and another related article:
McPhee: University 'here to educate'

Here's my problem. Paying is being touted as the solution to cheating and I just don't see it.
Paying enrolled players doesn't do a single thing to stop the offers of payment to high school players to get them to enroll.
The amount of payment being considered still isn't going to allow for many tattoos in Columbus or driving a brand new car.
I can see some positives in paying but the writers touting it as the cure for cheating are living in a fantasy world.

Ahh, somebody finally figured it out, thank you asf'. Clearly this is a red herring thrown out in front of all the dogs (i.e. the media) to get them to run off on some wild goose chase while the taboo of 'paying recruits' sits right under their noses. But hey, let's 'change the discussion' to paying recruits for a little while to get them off our scent. Man is the media stupid.

Miss. St. lost a bidding war to Auburn for the services of Mr. Newton once he was forced out of Florida. Next thing you know, they're Nat. Champs. That's the ugly truth that hiding right in front of the media's face. Anybody can do the job of 'mouth-piece' for an institution, it takes balls to tell the emperer he has no clothes.

There is another red herring in the "pay to play" debate. It's the line about how much money the players make for the school.

There are people who are LeBron James fans, they ran out and bought a Heat jersey to replace the Cleveland jersey. There are people are Favre fans. They ran out and bought a Vikings jersey to replace the Green Bay jersey.

Now how many fans who have a jersey with the number of Florida's starting QB would run out and buy a Florida State or FIU jersey if the kid were to transfer to Florida State or FIU?

You and me and the millions like us are what makes the money in college football. It's our affinity for the school, the colors, the logo, our connection with that team, not our interest in the player.

We go in as a fan before the player arrives, we remain one long after they are gone.

Exactly, yet the media runs off and follows any story put in front of them, like good little minions.

It really is a sad statement on what that line of work has come down to. Be a little inquisitive....please!

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/...-athletes/

The cartel always makes the argument what's best for the student athlete. If they are worried about paying a stipend, all they have to do is create a playoff in college football. The bowls are making all the money and not the schools. I just saw an article that Maryland is losing a ton of money.

When they can make the same argument for paying women's golf or any or minor sport, then they may have a valid argument.

BTW, they don't like it when schools like Butler and VCU make the Final Four and collect units. Just another reason to create their own D1.

(07-26-2011 10:52 AM)trojanbrutha Wrote:  http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/...-athletes/

This illustrates my point. Instead of the media looking into the 'actual' pay for play of Cam Newton (and probably finding a whole bunch of skeletons), let's bring up a subject from 20 years ago about paying the athletes. 'Yeah, that'll divert their attention until football season starts, then once the season starts nobody'll care about all that silly season stuff'.

We all know that paying the athletes is a 'non-starter'. It's just a diversion to get the media off their butts and kick this Cam Newton can down the road until they can hide under the cover of the season.

(07-26-2011 11:31 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  This illustrates my point. Instead of the media looking into the 'actual' pay for play of Cam Newton (and probably finding a whole bunch of skeletons), let's bring up a subject from 20 years ago about paying the athletes. 'Yeah, that'll divert their attention until football season starts, then once the season starts nobody'll care about all that silly season stuff'.

We all know that paying the athletes is a 'non-starter'. It's just a diversion to get the media off their butts and kick this Cam Newton can down the road until they can hide under the cover of the season.

Good point.
I had almost forgotten about that.....I guess it's working.

(07-26-2011 10:52 AM)trojanbrutha Wrote:  http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/...-athletes/

Hadn't considered collective bargaining, but think of the cost of workers comp insurance along with the tax implications.

Catch 22. If you pay them, then you are just another minor league pro situation. On the other hand, the Big Six school systems are making a TON of money out of them.