Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)


Post Reply 
Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
WhitetailWizard Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 383
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 4
I Root For: TROY
Location:
Post: #61
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-23-2015 11:41 PM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 11:11 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  There are still a lot of issues to be settled. One school in the league used an example of a student athlete on full pell grant plus this money and their monthly take home would be more than like 30 athletic department employees ... That's not right.

My understanding is that Pell Grants and stipends would both be based on the actual cost of attendance calculated for each individual school and double-dipping by getting both would not be allowed. A player would be allowed to collect from both sources but the total received is not allowed to exceed the limit that each operates under.

If that is the model and the cap is $5,000 for FCOA then many kids would not see any additional money against a full Pell.I don't think this is the message the NCAA is looking for.I can see the government reducing Pell benefits against a stipend eventually though due to the fact they have no "good faith" obligation they are trying to propagate with student-athletes
02-24-2015 08:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
warhawk09 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,348
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 117
I Root For: Bob
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
At first I think the pell was counting towards, but I believe it's not part of the equation
02-24-2015 08:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
runamuck Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,962
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 31
I Root For: uta
Location: DFW
Post: #63
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-23-2015 12:06 PM)panama Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 12:04 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  What I'm more concerned with it the notion of the P5 increasing scholarship limits to 100. That was put in place to better disperse the talent pool and would be a direct hit at the G5 schools.

Doubt that happens. It helps Texas and Bama but the Iowa State's and Texas Tech's will be against that.

schools like iowa state that are perennial also-rans in football may have to stretch a little to make ends meet, but they will do it to stay in the top level. tech has plenty deep pockets and will have no trouble keeping up with the ut's and ou's
02-24-2015 08:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WhitetailWizard Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 383
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation: 4
I Root For: TROY
Location:
Post: #64
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
That makes more sense as I see that back door approach to saving funds stoking the already large bondfire of poor PR around this issue.
02-24-2015 08:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Online
Legend
*

Posts: 31,353
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #65
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.
This

Ultimately schools are going to have to figure out where to find this in their budget or not offer it all. It will not be the end of civilization as we know it. For a school with a $25M budget you are talking about increasing that budget by maybe 4%. If you dont offer it schools will use it as a recruiting point against you but they already use other points against schools anyway in recruiting. This is not a game changer.
02-24-2015 08:54 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Saint3333 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,413
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 854
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
I can't remember a change of this mangnitude.
02-24-2015 09:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KJ Eagle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,134
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 42
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #67
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.

I understand your point, but the issue IMO is that they are already being "paid" in the form of all of the free stuff that they get, including a free education for the few that actually take it seriously. They just choose to ignore that since it's not cash money in their hands.

It may be $15 a day now, but how quickly does it turn into $25, then $35, then $50? What if it's $15 from your school, but $25 from another school? Then how do the schools give it to them. Do they give them a weekly check, do they give them a lump sum? How many 18-20 year olds do you think will have a penny left to their name after a month if they were given $5,000 in a lump sum? In most cases, it will all go to the flashy, cool stuff and not to anything that they "need".
02-24-2015 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
warhawk09 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,348
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 117
I Root For: Bob
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 09:39 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.

I understand your point, but the issue IMO is that they are already being "paid" in the form of all of the free stuff that they get, including a free education for the few that actually take it seriously. They just choose to ignore that since it's not cash money in their hands.

It may be $15 a day now, but how quickly does it turn into $25, then $35, then $50? What if it's $15 from your school, but $25 from another school? Then how do the schools give it to them. Do they give them a weekly check, do they give them a lump sum? How many 18-20 year olds do you think will have a penny left to their name after a month if they were given $5,000 in a lump sum? In most cases, it will all go to the flashy, cool stuff and not to anything that they "need".

The thing is a lot of these players are getting cash in their pockets in the form of rent checks
02-24-2015 09:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CajunAmos Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,496
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 36
I Root For: Cajuns
Location:
Post: #69
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-23-2015 11:07 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 09:53 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 07:20 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 05:50 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 05:44 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  That's not true ... doesn't have to be all

Just to clarify by all I meant all athletes and all sports. You can't fund football and not other sports unless you want to spend all your time in court. You can probably fund at a much lower level than other schools or at a percentage of your maximum allowed. JMO

You don't have to do all sports; stay title IX complaint and you're fine.

Football doesn't fall into Title IX. If you think the rest of the sports will sit quietly by while football players start collecting $5K a year I think you're mistaken.

It won't really be up to them and how the hell does title IX not include football?

Because when they originally did the Title IX requirements football was made exempt due to the large number of scholarships. To keep it equal schools would have had to basically drop all other men's sports and add all women's sports to equal the amount of scholarships just devoted to the 85 that football is allowed.
02-24-2015 11:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bobcat87 Offline
San Marvelous Cat
*

Posts: 10,510
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 358
I Root For: TXST, A&M, UNT
Location: Texas
Post: #70
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 09:39 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.

I understand your point, but the issue IMO is that they are already being "paid" in the form of all of the free stuff that they get, including a free education for the few that actually take it seriously. They just choose to ignore that since it's not cash money in their hands.

It may be $15 a day now, but how quickly does it turn into $25, then $35, then $50? What if it's $15 from your school, but $25 from another school? Then how do the schools give it to them. Do they give them a weekly check, do they give them a lump sum? How many 18-20 year olds do you think will have a penny left to their name after a month if they were given $5,000 in a lump sum? In most cases, it will all go to the flashy, cool stuff and not to anything that they "need".

I think that this is a legitimate concern, now that you've opened that door, where does it end?
I have another question though? Does anyone see this as having a possible adverse effect on donations to programs? Does anyone think that some doners might look at this and say: "Well, if they can give them free tuition, room, board, books, and now a stipend, then they don't need my money." Anyone see this as a possibility?
I don't think it'll matter to the "BIG" money doners, but I wonder how some marginal doners might look at this . . . . Thoughts?
02-24-2015 12:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CajunExpress Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,914
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 23
I Root For: Louisiana
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-23-2015 05:02 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 01:20 PM)panama Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 01:19 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 12:19 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 12:04 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  What I'm more concerned with it the notion of the P5 increasing scholarship limits to 100. That was put in place to better disperse the talent pool and would be a direct hit at the G5 schools.

I don't think Scholarship levels can be touched as part of the new structure.

That would require a full membership vote

Not needed and not gonna happen. P5 has already gotten what they wanted.

Not sure what you mean by not needed; but yes there are plenty of P5 schools that would want to expand scholarship limits.


That 85 limit scholarship helps the vast majority of the P5 schools more than it hurts them. Think about this, OSH, and Michigan get thirty extra scholarships between the two of them if it goes to a hundred. Who gets hurt more G5 or Illinois, Northwestern, and most of the Big Ten members. The Big Ten has been a three to five top heavy league forever. SEC, not as bad, Big XII Texas, Oklahoma, Pac XII is a cross between SEC and Big Ten but more like the Big 10 IMO.
02-24-2015 12:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #72
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
The further down the ladder you go the less talent a school will have. So imo osu and mich. Are stealing some talent from ill etc.. but they are taking from g5. As you go the stars get fewer per recruit.
02-24-2015 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
warhawk09 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,348
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 117
I Root For: Bob
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 11:07 AM)CajunAmos Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 11:07 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 09:53 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 07:20 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  
(02-23-2015 05:50 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  Just to clarify by all I meant all athletes and all sports. You can't fund football and not other sports unless you want to spend all your time in court. You can probably fund at a much lower level than other schools or at a percentage of your maximum allowed. JMO

You don't have to do all sports; stay title IX complaint and you're fine.

Football doesn't fall into Title IX. If you think the rest of the sports will sit quietly by while football players start collecting $5K a year I think you're mistaken.

It won't really be up to them and how the hell does title IX not include football?

Because when they originally did the Title IX requirements football was made exempt due to the large number of scholarships. To keep it equal schools would have had to basically drop all other men's sports and add all women's sports to equal the amount of scholarships just devoted to the 85 that football is allowed.
What? Football is not excluded from title IX, you're just making stuff up.
02-24-2015 12:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #74
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
Im pretty sure thats BS.
02-24-2015 01:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SlyFox Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,775
Joined: Feb 2010
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Liberty
Location: Lake Conroe, Texas
Post: #75
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
The Title IX aspect has created some incredible drama behind the scenes at schools across the country. One of the more interesting battles is between the coaches associations of volleyball and womens basketball. Both are vying to be higher in the pecking order for the stipends that are being created to manage Title IX requirements of CoA. Do a quick Google and prepare for some fun watching those two sports go after each other. The repercussions of Full CoA are proving to be much more complex than originally expected.

For the record, I know a school who would be more than willing to pay whatever full cost of attendance is required and would be thrilled to step up for you all.
02-24-2015 01:00 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cleburneslim Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,551
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 25
I Root For: jax state
Location:
Post: #76
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
If your surprised by its complexity you were very shortsight. Put on your seatbelt this is just getting started and stipends are only the start.
02-24-2015 01:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Online
Legend
*

Posts: 31,353
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 633
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #77
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 09:39 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.

I understand your point, but the issue IMO is that they are already being "paid" in the form of all of the free stuff that they get, including a free education for the few that actually take it seriously. They just choose to ignore that since it's not cash money in their hands.

It may be $15 a day now, but how quickly does it turn into $25, then $35, then $50? What if it's $15 from your school, but $25 from another school? Then how do the schools give it to them. Do they give them a weekly check, do they give them a lump sum? How many 18-20 year olds do you think will have a penny left to their name after a month if they were given $5,000 in a lump sum? In most cases, it will all go to the flashy, cool stuff and not to anything that they "need".

How could it quickly turn into $25 then $35? Its FCOA! How is given to them? How is meal money given to them today? Seems like we are looking for issues where there are none. FCOA of attendance is an actual thing...today...for all students. How you reach that as a student is up to you and your parents. Usually a combo of cash, student loans, grants, work study and and/or an actual job. And here we are nickel and diming over $15 a day. Amazing.
02-24-2015 01:23 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Vobserver Offline
Sun Belt Nationalist
*

Posts: 2,423
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 102
I Root For: Louisiana
Location:
Post: #78
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-23-2015 11:11 PM)warhawk09 Wrote:  There are still a lot of issues to be settled. One school in the league used an example of a student athlete on full pell grant plus this money and their monthly take home would be more than like 30 athletic department employees ... That's not right.

I can assure you that if this goes in, no full scholarship student athlete will be Pell eligible. The Pell Grant system counts any scholarships you have as 'family contribution' and will not give a grant to a person whose 'family contribution' is equal to or greater than the 'full cost of attendance'. Whose numbers do you think schools will be using to determine full cost? Pell's.
02-24-2015 01:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TheRevSWT Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,502
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 133
I Root For: Bobcats!
Location:
Post: #79
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 01:04 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  If your surprised by its complexity you were very shortsight. Put on your seatbelt this is just getting started and stipends are only the start.

The way this is being handled, it's reminding me of the implementation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002.

Nobody really knew the impact of the implementation of the Act, only that they wanted it done, and it got done.

Still remember one politician saying he expected it to have an impact of about 40 audit hours per company. In the end, it was closer to 100 times that amount. That's like lawyer cost per hour.

Folks didn't realize the cost of the act until they were knee deep in it.
02-24-2015 02:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KJ Eagle Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,134
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 42
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #80
RE: Pay to play? UL looks to fund full attendance stipend for athletes
(02-24-2015 01:23 PM)panama Wrote:  
(02-24-2015 09:39 AM)KJ Eagle Wrote:  
(02-24-2015 04:02 AM)airtroop Wrote:  Wow... I completely understand the fans who want their schools to remain in the black or grey by staying away from the stipend. OTOH, I cannot understand why people would freak out over a college athlete earning the equivalent of $10 to $15 per day for their cost of attendance and more like $3 to $5 per day for partial scholly athletes to help them out just a little bit? I'm a professional musician. The "average pay" for me to perform is anywhere from $100.00 and (way!) up. Musicians who work for a small percentage of the door are NOT "professionals" in my opinion. Professional football players and baseball players make upwards of MILLIONS per year while their minor leaguers earn a few hundred bucks a week PLUS have free room and board for the most part. A college baseball player getting an extra $5 per day or a full scholly football player, $13 per day doesn't qualify as a "professional" in a practical manner. Technical manner... a huge stretch, but maybe. I'm sure A-Rod and Tom Brady would laugh in your faces if you tried to convince either one of them a college athlete being reimbursed few bucks a day in true cost of attendance money puts them in the same camp as they are.

I understand your point, but the issue IMO is that they are already being "paid" in the form of all of the free stuff that they get, including a free education for the few that actually take it seriously. They just choose to ignore that since it's not cash money in their hands.

It may be $15 a day now, but how quickly does it turn into $25, then $35, then $50? What if it's $15 from your school, but $25 from another school? Then how do the schools give it to them. Do they give them a weekly check, do they give them a lump sum? How many 18-20 year olds do you think will have a penny left to their name after a month if they were given $5,000 in a lump sum? In most cases, it will all go to the flashy, cool stuff and not to anything that they "need".

How could it quickly turn into $25 then $35? Its FCOA! How is given to them? How is meal money given to them today? Seems like we are looking for issues where there are none. FCOA of attendance is an actual thing...today...for all students. How you reach that as a student is up to you and your parents. Usually a combo of cash, student loans, grants, work study and and/or an actual job. And here we are nickel and diming over $15 a day. Amazing.

As soon as you pay them something, they will come up with a reason to pay them more. It will always continue to grow. You can't unsqueeze the toothpaste.

So tell me oh insightful one 04-bow .....what is the FCOA for a football player that is on a full ride? What else does he have to pay for that is not covered by his scholarship? If he can't afford his own $15/day, then maybe he should choose not to play football and to get a real job and pay for his own tuition and have a real FCOA just like the other 90% of the students in college.
02-24-2015 02:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.