Paying NCAA Athletes...everyone seems to agree that athletes are missing out on money.

 

But how do you pay them, how much, does every athlete get paid or just the ones in the income producing sports?

 

Do you let them earn their pay by marketing their image for them and giving them the proceeds or letting them sell their autographs?

 

Everyone wants to pay athletes...but how should/could it be done?

Short of $500 or $600 per month extra for misc money, no they shouldn't be paid.

I don't think that the NCAA or individual schools should pay athletes directly, but they shouldn't be prohibited from making any money on their own. If someone is willing to pay an athlete for an autography, why not let them. If Coca-Cola wants to use an athlete in an ad and pay them, so what?

I don't think that the NCAA or individual schools should pay athletes directly, but they shouldn't be prohibited from making any money on their own. If someone is willing to pay an athlete for an autography, why not let them. If Coca-Cola wants to use an athlete in an ad and pay them, so what?

 

"Johnny Football, come to Alabama, we can get you $20,000 for autographs. A&M can only get you $10,000."

"Johnny Football, come to Alabama, we can get you $20,000 for autographs. A&M can only get you $10,000."

 

^ This is exactly why you can't let them work on the side. How much would Andrew Wiggins be making this year signing autographs if the schools were able to get in a bidding war for him. Heck there are alumni that would probably pay $100K for an autograph if that is what was needed to get a player to come to their school.

I don't think athletes should be paid by the university. The reality is those on a full ride are already getting a $50k-$80k education paid for. Free medical treatment, training, nutrition and a lot of other on top makes it even more valuable. And yes star football players do make money for the school....but how many true, marketable college stars are there?. And if you pay football players, you have to pay everyone else that plays a sport. How much do you pay the women's rowing team members that generate very little income for the school. As it is football and basketball are the only real revenue drivers. And at many schools, after scholly's, room and board, equipment, coaches, trainers, and facilities, some smaller schools aren't making a ton of money off sports.

Paying NCAA Athletes...everyone seems to agree that athletes are missing out on money.

 

But how do you pay them, how much, does every athlete get paid or just the ones in the income producing sports?

 

Do you let them earn their pay by marketing their image for them and giving them the proceeds or letting them sell their autographs?

 

Everyone wants to pay athletes...but how should/could it be done?

 

I may be in the minority but I don't think they should be paid especially if they are on a full ride.

 

What Johnny Football is being accused of pretty much proves the point that no matter how much money you have (His family is loaded and he never had a care in the world) you will always want more even when you don't need it.

 

If you are going to start to pay athletes, then how about starting with the athletes that do not get athletic scholarships and still have to finance their college education while still bringing money into the universities? How about paying DIII players and DII players etc.? They are the ones that need it, not the D1 full ride athletes.

I don't think athletes should be paid by the university. The reality is those on a full ride are already getting a $50k-$80k education paid for. Free medical treatment, training, nutrition and a lot of other on top makes it even more valuable. And yes star football players do make money for the school....but how many true, marketable college stars are there?. And if you pay football players, you have to pay everyone else that plays a sport. How much do you pay the women's rowing team members that generate very little income for the school. As it is football and basketball are the only real revenue drivers. And at many schools, after scholly's, room and board, equipment, coaches, trainers, and facilities, some smaller schools aren't making a ton of money off sports.

 

I agree with that!

 

But many are screaming that they must be paid. I know there are SOME schools and Conferences that could afford it but for many they would have to give up athletics programs if they were forced to pay players above and beyond room, board, health care and everything involved in getting a degree.

Here are the problems as I see it:

 

When the NCAA "amateurism" concept was designed, marketing and exposure was about 1/1000th of what it is today. You are using an antiquated system in today's ever-changing landscape. It does not work. Room and board, education, or other perks these guys receive, pales in comparison to how much Universities and the NCAA make off of them. It is exploitation. Name one other business that can get away with paying skittles for a billion dollar + operation? Why are "student-athletes" prohibited when any other student on campus with a talent, say a musician, is allowed to profit?

 

Worst part is I have no good solution. I just know it is a sham when Jay Bilas laughingly can type in any players name on the NCAA website and said player's jersey comes up on the screen so that the NCAA and school can sale their merchandise. Anyone can say what they want, but that is a flat out joke and flies right back in the face of the NCAA's purpose.

"Johnny Football, come to Alabama, we can get you $20,000 for autographs. A&M can only get you $10,000."

Apparently A&M was able to offer a little more.

Here are the problems as I see it:

 

When the NCAA "amateurism" concept was designed, marketing and exposure was about 1/1000th of what it is today. You are using an antiquated system in today's ever-changing landscape. It does not work. Room and board, education, or other perks these guys receive, pales in comparison to how much Universities and the NCAA make off of them. It is exploitation. Name one other business that can get away with paying skittles for a billion dollar + operation? Why are "student-athletes" prohibited when any other student on campus with a talent, say a musician, is allowed to profit?

How do you do it that it doesn't turn into a bidding war for recruits?

How do you do it that it doesn't turn into a bidding war for recruits?

 

Read the post again. I made an edit.

I have wondered what it would be like if you allowed it to be an all-out bidding war. Free-market system at its finest. I truly believe the results would be about the same.

Here are the problems as I see it:

 

When the NCAA "amateurism" concept was designed, marketing and exposure was about 1/1000th of what it is today. You are using an antiquated system in today's ever-changing landscape. It does not work. Room and board, education, or other perks these guys receive, pales in comparison to how much Universities and the NCAA make off of them. It is exploitation. Name one other business that can get away with paying skittles for a billion dollar + operation? Why are "student-athletes" prohibited when any other student on campus with a talent, say a musician, is allowed to profit?

 

You want me to name another business that pays skittles for a billion dollar operation? Ok, just about any government company. Let's just start with the military.

 

Something that a lot of people dismiss is the fact that Universities also make a lot of money outside the athletic department. They make it off of brillant students discovering new scietnific discoveries etc. They make it off students working on medical breakthroughs etc. Athletcis isn't the only money maker for these universities, should we start paying these genius students who bring in money as well as the notoriety the universities gain?

 

Athletes who think they are deserving to get paid by the university will open a huge can of worms. Now with that said, I have no problem with having money put away for the athletes by companies using their likeness etc. to sell their goods, and athletes getting the money after they leave the university due to graduation or going into the business world wether it be professional sports or anything else before graduation. EA sports for instance should give money to each and every school they use their representation of and when an athlete leaves the school they get a check for whatever it is for using their likeness.

Read the post again. I made an edit.

Yeah the NCAA thing is a mess, but in reality we are talking about around 1% of all NCAA athletes that are having their Jersey and # sold.

You can't stop a school or the NCAA from selling their schools jersey with a number on it. If they used the students name or photo it would be different.

 

If I get a #44 UK jersey should some of that money got to Dakari Johnson? Even though I bought #44 because Chuck Hayes is one of my all time favorite Wildcats. How about a #5 Jersey, who get's the money then Andrew Harrison or Jarrod Polson?