Derrick Henry...New Car.....Bama shenanigans?

[LouderVol]

vol66 I really liked on of you points (I think it was you any, apologies if I am wrong here) about the funds being tied to graduation, again how it is done matters more to me than the final result. (the player getting this extra money)

 

[KoachKletus]

what does it matter that the players spend more time and effort on football than school, it doesn't even matter if the school requires more than that. The NCAA has come out and set maximums the players can spend in practice, how much time they spend with coaches etc etc. So they have at least addressed (if not correctly) that problem. How many students that you knew had full time jobs, or families. Yet they still went to college, and I would definitely say in the case of families college wasn't even their main concern. I knew dozens of people who did this. Same thing as football players having to put in time on practice, video review, workout sessions etc. Everyone keeps wanting to put the players on a pedestal and say no one in college did similar things, had as many demands on them. I say this with complete honesty, and if you knew me you would know I am humble so I am not trying to brag, I wish I put in the hours football players did. That would have been sooo much less work than what I did. I have had two doctors tell me because of all the nights I spent without sleep that I should get counselling. The players aren't unique in the demands placed upon them, they aren't even the worse, I was not even the worst in my class. Stop with the pity party.

People make money off of other peoples hard work, that's capitalism. CEOs make billions when the people actually making the product/service/whatever make minimum wage. Hell we pay Congress and they haven't done anything in years, we barely get a budget approved. Stop acting like this is unique this is the only thing that needs improving and that this **** doesn't happen everywhere. The players are getting a damn good opportunity I would have fought for, and I think most of us here would have too. The US government thinks a scholarship is a fair way to pay our soldiers, if they choose the GI option, stop saying a scholarship is not a fair way to pay the players. I think some of the people have the silver spoon so far up their rear they don't even know the value of the things they were given. I was given it too but at least I appreciate it for its value.

With a lot of these kids they come from impoverished backgrounds, colleges take care of them for 4-5 years better than I had it growing up and I wasn't hurting for anything. Life liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. America was built on the principal that you could have the opportunity to better yourself by your hard work, and that exactly what these colleges are doing, giving these players a chance to improve themselves and their situation, off of the players own hard work.

sorry for run-ons and gramitical errors, when i get going I don't stop.

repeat the part about needing professional counseling.

 

[vol66]

College athletes do not need to get paid. Along with massive scholarships that cover everything, state and federal grants and student loans they have plenty of money.

That is all.

Your first sentence is a fine and reasonable thing to say.

Your second sentence, the reasoning for your first sentence, however is fatally flawed.

"Along with massive scholarships that cover everything..."

The head of the NCAA, and the conference commissioners of the Big Five conferences ALL disagree that the scholarships "cover everything".

"...state and federal grants and student loans, they have plenty of money."

If the "massive scholarships" covers everything, why do they need to take out student loans? Is it because, the scholarships don't cover everything?




When Steve Spurrier said he wanted to pay the players out of his own pocket, and several other SEC football coaches agreed, if not with the method, with the concept... his proposal was this:

$300.00 bucks per game for the 70 guys that play in the game.

That turns out to be $3,600/player/12 games, roughly on the high end of proposals by the CFPA for cost of attendance.

That would cost Steve Spurrier $252,000 dollars over a twelve game schedule, $273,300 if they go to a bowl. I don't know the particulars of his contract, but I know CBJ's.

If Butch Jones gets us in a BCS Bowl, he makes $300, 000. If he gets us in a BCS bowl, we are likely a top 25 team ($50,000) if not top 10 ($100,000) so tack that on...

Do I think these coaches would gladly hand over those bonuses so they didn't get a phone call 4 hours after the game from a player who is demanding a pizza which happens to be against the rules for the coach to deliver?

Yeah I'm talking to you Arian and Jarnell (Tacos?).

Yes, I think they would.

$273,000 of a nearly $100,000,000 budget is a drop in the bucket for the schools we're talking about.

Throw in the 13 basketball players and the 15 football players the "ol ball coach left out...$352, 800

But let's go further, so we can get around title IX and not piss off the golfers...pay all 258 (i saw this number 258.2 scholarship athletes at UT in 2005, I think, it could be off)...Pay them all an extra $3600...

$928,800.00 Now THAT is a lot of money right? The budget for coaches salaries at UT is...wait for it...about $36,000,000

Not for paying players is fine, but at least throw up a reasonable argument as opposed to one that is patently false.

 

[RollinVol]

Your first sentence is a fine and reasonable thing to say.

Your second sentence, the reasoning for your first sentence, however is fatally flawed.

"Along with massive scholarships that cover everything..."

The head of the NCAA, and the conference commissioners of the Big Five conferences ALL disagree that the scholarships "cover everything".

"...state and federal grants and student loans, they have plenty of money."

If the "massive scholarships" covers everything, why do they need to take out student loans? Is it because, the scholarships don't cover everything?




When Steve Spurrier said he wanted to pay the players out of his own pocket, and several other SEC football coaches agreed, if not with the method, with the concept... his proposal was this:

$300.00 bucks per game for the 70 guys that play in the game.

That turns out to be $3,600/player/12 games, roughly on the high end of proposals by the CFPA for cost of attendance.

That would cost Steve Spurrier $252,000 dollars over a twelve game schedule, $273,300 if they go to a bowl. I don't know the particulars of his contract, but I know CBJ's.

If Butch Jones gets us in a BCS Bowl, he makes $300, 000. If he gets us in a BCS bowl, we are likely a top 25 team ($50,000) if not top 10 ($100,000) so tack that on...

Do I think these coaches would gladly hand over those bonuses so they didn't get a phone call 4 hours after the game from a player who is demanding a pizza which happens to be against the rules for the coach to deliver?

Yeah I'm talking to you Arian and Jarnell (Tacos?).

Yes, I think they would.

$273,000 of a nearly $100,000,000 budget is a drop in the bucket for the schools we're talking about.

Throw in the 13 basketball players and the 15 football players the "ol ball coach left out...$352, 800

But let's go further, so we can get around title IX and not piss off the golfers...pay all 258 (i saw this number 258.2 scholarship athletes at UT in 2005, I think, it could be off)...Pay them all an extra $3600...

$928,800.00 Now THAT is a lot of money right? The budget for coaches salaries at UT is...wait for it...about $36,000,000

Not for paying players is fine, but at least throw up a reasonable argument as opposed to one that is patently false.

i agree with some of your premise. but the difference to me is. give $3600 to football for 12 games. but $3600 for basketball for 30+ games $3600 for baseball for 40+ games. would send the cost up if you did $300 per person per game no matter the sport. if you just left it at $3600 for each athlete no matter the sport, i could see some real problems there

 

[vol66]

i agree with some of your premise. but the difference to me is. give $3600 to football for 12 games. but $3600 for basketball for 30+ games $3600 for baseball for 40+ games. would send the cost up if you did $300 per person per game no matter the sport. if you just left it at $3600 for each athlete no matter the sport, i could see some real problems there

My post was to tell another poster that everyone knows that a scholarship isn't enough. That everyone that matters believes cost of attendance needs to be addressed.

I was simply pointing out that it's not as much money as people think. It wasn't my premise, it was Spurriers, who didn't include anyone but the 70 players, and why would he, he has no interest in paying the basketball players it's not his problem, which you know, is kind of funny, and very Spurrier-esque...

The fact that it came out to $3600 dollars was interesting because it just so happens that, in some of the studies/reports I have read, for a school like Texas, that's about the difference between the scholarship and what full cost would mean...I think UT came in about $3000 too.

I wasn't suggesting that they come to a figure based on how many games, as you rightly say, basketball players play more games...for that matter baseball players on partials play more than basketball players and after the season is over they have to go out and buy wooden bats and finance a trip to Alaska, every time they break one, it's one hundred bucks...I know, I know, baseball doesn't generate revenue.

I was simply pointing out that all this hee hawing about the collapse of college sports is...well, is just that. Had they simply made this adjustment at anytime over the last 20 years, since it appears they have been debating it that long, we might not be where we are today.

Cost of attendance is coming, like it or not and if that's all it ends up being it's a darn bargain for these particular Universities.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Alabama cheats and has ties to the NCAA, these are both facts.

College athletes do not need to get paid. Along with massive scholarships that cover everything, state and federal grants and student loans they have plenty of money.

That is all.

So, you have the right to determine someone's worth, but you would reject my one meatball a week to you in exchange to work?

Its not about whether something covers something or not... the argument can be easily be made that paying $5 a seat to watch a game covers the cost of the stadium. So? Does that mean I should set prices? Of course not.

To me this whole thing has nothing or very little do with paying players, although, depending on the situation it might be. To me its about control or lack of one to control their own destiny. There are no exceptions to what they are trying to do to these players... .they should be ashamed of themselves at this point... of course, $$$$ does bring out the worst in people.