VOLinthaNATI
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2006
- Messages
- 15,501
- Likes
- 2
It isn't that simple. There is no guarantee whether O'Bannon will prevail on the merits of the case; there have been multiple issues raised in that case. Whatever is decided in that case, the "ruling" will be appealed!
This being said the basic issue in the case (originally) was/is "profiting" from an amateur athlete's "likeness" - see EA Sports. The issue really does not involve pay for play.
I think saying paying college players is good.
But actually paying them would be tough. I think the fairest thing to do is let do it like NCAA/MLB baseball. Where if the player commits they are in college no matter what for 3 years, otherwise they could go pro. That solves the one and done thing in bball too.
Paying college athletes is a STUPID idea that has gained, er, currency among some dopey sports-talk hosts/pundits in recent years. Paying athletes would open a huge can of worms and ruin college athletics. We should be downsizing college football and basketball, not making them more like pro sports. It won't happen, but that's what we should do. Beyond that, colleges have no money now--most athletic departments lose money. They couldn't possible afford to pay athletes. And how much are you going to pay them? And are you going to pay just football and basketball players but not soccer and tennis players? Athletic scholarships at many schools are worth about $100,000 over four years--that's a lot of money right there. They don't need more.
NCAA requires football players to be in school for at least 3 years.
NCAA requires football players to be in school for at least 3 years.
no.
the nfl/nflpa have an agreement that a player will not be drafted who is not a certain age or who has not been in college for three years.
there's a difference.
otherwise, ohio state would have invoked their "master" clause in the scholarship agreement and returned maurice clarett back into slavery.
This may belong in the NCAA forum, but I figure it can work in here too.
Heard the debate that's age-old I'm sure today on the Drive, talking about whether or not players should get paid or not, since the NCAA makes so much money off of them.
I just hadn't seen a thread on it, and if there is one, I apologize, and merge immediately.
But I just don't know how I feel about it.
On one hand, we give them a paid for education, with housing, food, nutritionists, weightrooms, tutors, hotel rooms and trips. And so I would think that's pretty fair.
But then you have the NCAA that's making a ton of money off of these kids. And I think about kids on academic scholarship. Nobody is really making anything off of their success. At least not to my knowledge.
But I mean, nobody would have bought an #11 jersey this past year had it not been for Justin Hunter. And no, it doesn't have his name on it always. But it's obvious that it's his.
I just want to know where you all stand on it. Should the NCAA allow players to be paid, or keep it as it is? Or should we just go the route of super conferences, and let each conference dictate what they do?
As I said, I'm sure this debate is somewhere else on this mega site...but I hadn't really seen it recently, but it's resurfacing as a issue.
Thoughts?
A couple hundred? So you think its possible for a university with a college football team with at least 85 players would fork out $884,000 per year at $200 per week?
Please come join us in the real world sir.
How much do schools pay fired ex-coaches? How much do tennis and softball coaches make? How much are teams willing to lose to play in a bowl game? The idea that major-conference football programs couldn't come up with a lousy $800,000 a year if they had to is nonsense.
A couple hundred? So you think its possible for a university with a college football team with at least 85 players would fork out $884,000 per year at $200 per week?
Please come join us in the real world sir.
Ummmmmm. That's just for one team. :salute:
Also, even if we are just talking football how many D1 schools do you consider major? What about the ones that are not "major?" Do their players only get $100 per week?