Should Players Get Paid?

[99gator]

Apples and oranges. No one goes to a grocery to see a cashier's sick scanning skills. The cashier doesn't really MAKE the store any money in the way that a college athlete makes a school money. The college athlete directly brings in revenue, the cashier just collects it.

I see.

So, movie stars don't get paid when the movie bombs at the box office

 

[tenmanjonez]

I see.

So, movie stars don't get paid when the movie bombs at the box office

If I'm not mistaken, most movie STARS get paid based on % of profit. So, no, if the movie bombs, they don't get paid as much. That's exactly how it should be in in football in my opinion, except on a much lower percentage. Read the post before my last one about my idea for it, let me know your ideas on that.

 

[cityvol]

Students on campuses across the country are leeched upon by ADs, Research Departments, Academic Departments, etc. I provided hours of free labor for the University of Tennessee while I was earning my degree. The experience and networking I received from this labor is priceless. Man up and don't give in to the folks that want to ruin college athletics. Do not pay them a dime!

 

[99gator]

If I'm not mistaken, most movie STARS get paid based on % of profit. So, no, if the movie bombs, they don't get paid as much. That's exactly how it should be in in football in my opinion, except on a much lower percentage. Read the post before my last one about my idea for it, let me know your ideas on that.

Some contracts call for a % of the box office.

Other contracts are for for a certain dollar amount regardless of the box office take

 

[tenmanjonez]

Some contracts call for a % of the box office.

Other contracts are for for a certain dollar amount regardless of the box office take

That is my understanding. My original idea was to take 1 percent of ticket office earnings from tickets sold at the end of the season (home and away, all tickets are taken into this equation) and give it to the respective athletic team. So, you give 1 pct of ticket sales to the football team to divide up between ALL the scholarship players, AND any walk-ons that played in AT LEAST half of the games over the year. Split it up EVENLY.

 

[99gator]

I've always thought there was a good way to do it responsibly, and it reflects directly what their performance on the field is. NCAA should put in place a rule where the School takes 1% of ticket office sales and says they have to give it to the respective team to divide EVENLY amongst the SCHOLARSHIP players. If 1% is a make you/break you deal for the school than there's a larger issue than that 1%. This also adds the incentive to the players that, the more they're involved with fans, and the better they play, the more tickets are sold, which means the more $$ for them at the end of the season.

If they could separate revenue from non revenue sports in any way, that would open doors for many solutions.

Title Ix folks won't let that happen

 

[99gator]

That is my understanding. My original idea was to take 1 percent of ticket office earnings from tickets sold at the end of the season (home and away, all tickets are taken into this equation) and give it to the respective athletic team. So, you give 1 pct of ticket sales to the football team to divide up between ALL the scholarship players, AND any walk-ons that played in AT LEAST half of the games over the year. Split it up EVENLY.

For sake of argument, why does a scholarship athlete who doesn't play get paid but a walk on doesn't

 

[tenmanjonez]

For sake of argument, why does a scholarship athlete who doesn't play get paid but a walk on doesn't

It's the only way, in my opinion, to draw the line. I'm not saying it's the right way to do it, but there is the possibility of being able to split it up between all the players. I would prefer that if there was a way to do that, then that's my preference. I'm not a fan of players getting a cut of jersey sales, because, take Paul Harris for example. If anyone goes out to buy a #1 jersey, they could be buying it cause witten, little, swain, etc wore it, not necessarily Harris. I know this wasn't in your statement/question, but it's a solution that i've heard people throw out, and I think it's ridiculous.

 

[tenmanjonez]

If they could separate revenue from non revenue sports in any way, that would open doors for many solutions.

Title Ix folks won't let that happen

It's not hard... They keep track of what tickets they sell. Football get's 1 pct of football revenue, women's basketball 1 pct of WBB revenue, MBB 1 pct, etc etc... You don't sell tickets, you don't get revenue. Incentive based.

 

[TNHopeful505]

Ha. What have I done?

 

[TNHopeful505]

Lots of good arguments on here.

Personally, I think that if ANYTHING is done, then players should be given the same amount as a student with a work study job. Typically, that's about $50-70 a week. That is more than plenty for a responsible college student to live, especially if they use their meal plan and don't travel often.

This really is a tough question. But if we really think about it, the players that the NCAA are making money off of, are typically the players that are going to make the big bucks in the NFL. I doubt that the NCAA is making a huge chunk of change by selling Ben Bartholomew's jersey or merchandise. And yes, Tennessee is making some (though not really, when we have a ton in debt) money through the football team, but it's also expending upwards of $30,000 a year on each player in free tuition. Every scholarship that is given out is money that is not going towards teachers' salaries, facilities, etc. Plus, once you consider that UT is in the process of building new athletic dorms just for the athletes, and the new Thunderdome of Power equipped with a professional nutritionist and all of the healthy food and equipment they could want.

I mean, these athletes get a lot. Do I think that they should at least get a work study salary, yes. If you are not going to allow them to have a job outside of football and school, then absolutely. They need to have something to allow them to occasionally buy things that are needed/wanted, like any other regular 18-22 year old would.

However, do I think that just because the NCAA is pocketing a ton of money, mainly off of the success of a few players that are eventually going to make a ton of money anyways in the NFL, or through endorsements, that we need to give them a cut at it? No.

The NCAA provides the way to the NFL. You cannot play in the NFL (or at least it's nearly impossible) if you do not play at a NCAA school. Therefore, the NCAA is giving players the market value and exposure needed to make the millions of dollars that are potentially there for them. And if they don't make it to the NFL, they are still provided with a high quality education, and entered into the world with regional recognition and no debt.

And so, in my opinion, the NCAA has a right to be able to make money from the players and teams, as they are giving them the opportunity to be able to make millions, or at least to have a successful life by giving them a free education, if the players stay true to academics and behavior.

So, in short. No, don't pay them. Just a work-study salary should suffice.

 

[99gator]

It's not hard... They keep track of what tickets they sell. Football get's 1 pct of football revenue, women's basketball 1 pct of WBB revenue, MBB 1 pct, etc etc... You don't sell tickets, you don't get revenue. Incentive based.

the dollars would have to be equal not the percent.

trust me, the title ix folks won't like your idea

 

[TennesseeOrange]

the dollars would have to be equal not the percent.

trust me, the title ix folks won't like your idea

It would depend on how they handed out the money. Title IX requires certain things to be equitable like opportunities to participate and certain benefits, but scholarships are proportional to participation. (So while a percentage of each sport might not be proportional overall, they could take a percentage of total revenue and distribute that proportional to percentage of males/females and be okay). It would reach the same result if you gave every student-athlete the same amount of money.

Financial Assistance:
However, the total amount of assistance awarded to men and women must be substantially proportionate to their participation rates in athletic programs. In other words, if 60 percent of an institution's intercollegiate athletes are male, the total amount of aid going to male athletes should be approximately 60 percent of the financial aid dollars the institution awards.

Equal Opportunity In Intercollegiate Athletics: RequirementsUnder Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972

 

[TNHopeful505]

the dollars would have to be equal not the percent.

trust me, the title ix folks won't like your idea

Exactly. 1 percent of 100,000 tickets at an average of $50 a ticket is a lot more than 1 percent of 20,000 at an average of $30.

Plus, the football team has 85 scholarship players, the basketball teams have less than 20.

Just wouldn't work out mathematically.

 

[onevol74]

I mean they're basically slave labor at this point. I don't know what the right answer is though..

There is no such thing as slave labor when you have a choice of signing up or walking away. They get to choose if they want to play football and which school they want to go to.

I did the same thing for my vocation and so does every college student. I earned it and I prospered from it just like these kids do.

 

[onevol74]

I would like for someone in the know to tell us what these kids actually are receiving now before having this discussion. If the athletic teams get some money out of the pot then we should share it with the band students, engineering students, education students, etc. Those people put in long hours also.

 

[oregonvol]

I would like for someone in the know to tell us what these kids actually are receiving now before having this discussion. If the athletic teams get some money out of the pot then we should share it with the band students, engineering students, education students, etc. Those people put in long hours also.

no one pays to watch people study engineering.

 

[82_VOL_83]

If you are one of those who want to pay them, just which sports are you willing to sacrifice in order for the AD to recoup the money? I get tired of the "ignorance" of some on here (even a moderator who shall remain nameless) who think that there is a bottomless pit of money in the NCAA and in the individual AD's and that everyone is getting rich. There are fewer and fewer AD's in the country that run in the black every year. Where is the money going to come from to pay players at the schools running in the red? Please give some thought to this before you step up and make a pro sport out of college athletics, in particular football. It is already nearly cost prohibitive to go to a game now, imagine when ticket prices go to over $100 for upper deck from the ticket office in addition to the required donation. You think a large flat screen and a cooler of beer on Saturday are attractive now?!?!?!?!? Pay those players, pay those prices, and please pay me some more!

» Self-Sustaining Athletic Departments: More Than What Meets the Eye

 

[82_VOL_83]

There is no such thing as slave labor when you have a choice of signing up or walking away. They get to choose if they want to play football and which school they want to go to.

I did the same thing for my vocation and so does every college student. I earned it and I prospered from it just like these kids do.

This whole discussion falls along the lines of political leaning. You and I agree on this but some people will NEVER agree as long as the people that are running the show make more than those doing the work. They are those that feel that union members should make as much as the company owners.....I don't understand it, I just can't get the mindset that I am a slave when I have a choice to be there or not.

Also, these are the same people that wanted to pay JG 10 mil a year to come here and coach. They have NO IDEA about how to handle money, only how to spend money that doesn't belong to them.

 

[tenmanjonez]

If you are one of those who want to pay them, just which sports are you willing to sacrifice in order for the AD to recoup the money? I get tired of the "ignorance" of some on here (even a moderator who shall remain nameless) who think that there is a bottomless pit of money in the NCAA and in the individual AD's and that everyone is getting rich. There are fewer and fewer AD's in the country that run in the black every year. Where is the money going to come from to pay players at the schools running in the red? Please give some thought to this before you step up and make a pro sport out of college athletics, in particular football. It is already nearly cost prohibitive to go to a game now, imagine when ticket prices go to over $100 for upper deck from the ticket office in addition to the required donation. You think a large flat screen and a cooler of beer on Saturday are attractive now?!?!?!?!? Pay those players, pay those prices, and please pay me some more!

» Self-Sustaining Athletic Departments: More Than What Meets the Eye

I can see where you're coming from with this. My idea, while I have no clue of the NCAA by-laws concerning it's legality, was to give 1 pct of ticket sales to the particular sport and split it between players. If the AD wanted to recoup this with a 1% increase, that brings 50 dollar tickets to $50.50. Brings $1000 dollar tickets to $1010. Not a noticeable difference in either regard, but would raise more than enough money to pay students legally at the end of the year based on how many fans they attract.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I can see where you're coming from with this. My idea, while I have no clue of the NCAA by-laws concerning it's legality, was to give 1 pct of ticket sales to the particular sport and split it between players. If the AD wanted to recoup this with a 1% increase, that brings 50 dollar tickets to $50.50. Brings $1000 dollar tickets to $1010. Not a noticeable difference in either regard, but would raise more than enough money to pay students legally at the end of the year based on how many fans they attract.

So basically you pay the players based on the amount of money they bring in.....so some would get nothing while others would get a decent check. Don't think the NCAA will agree with you on that.....don't think Title IX will either. The NCAA is nothing if not adamant about ALL student athletes being treated the same.

 

[82_VOL_83]

That's cool and all, but at schools with money the ones who can't afford it are given heavy financial aid anyway. If a player on the team has a kid, free education isn't putting food in his mouth, and neither is the money from the job that no athlete has time to have.

Don't have a kid while you are in HS or college......

 

[82_VOL_83]

This thread is full of butthurt from people that wish they had scholarships. I had a job in college, and any other student can easily get one too. An athlete has literally no means of making money while in college unless they sell drugs. That, combined with the ridiculous amount of money they bring in and see almost none of, is more than reason enough to give athletes a stipend. Hell, I know band members that get one.

An out of state student sees nearly 50k per year of that ridiculous money when all is said and done. They eat like freaking kings. They have top notch health care. They can live in any dorm on campus or get a stipend to live off campus as a JR or SR. They have free tutors. And, if they are good enough, they have had their job resume plastered across TV, Internet, Newspapers, etc. for 1 to 4 years. I would say the out of state gut gets in excess of 50k. I know that for instate that could probably be totaled up to nearly 30k per year. Especially if you have to have a little "knee scope".

Yeah that band stipend is a biggie isn't it? Let's see how full of it you are about that.....how much is that stipend?

I have a good idea, why don't we make them start paying income tax on the value of all the services that they receive now before we go giving them more? That way they can see what they are getting and then decided if they deserve more.

 

[82_VOL_83]

well because they cant go to the NFL at 18, which is a seperate but equally bs situation, and it is the only realistic way to get to the NFL

Yeah, all those hundreds of 18 year olds that could go directly to the NFL and compete. Your argument is weak at best.

 

[patrick]

The question should be why do you think football players should be paid or basketball players. Then the next question is do you pay non revenue generating scholarship athletes? They do as much work as football and basketball players in their sports and school work. Title 9 would require that if u pay one student athlete you have to pay them all. So football and bball would have to shoulder that burden.