Big 10 wants to pay players

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,282
113
#1
Interesting no one posted this yet.




CHICAGO -- Big Ten officials discussed a proposal that would pay athletes to help cover living expenses on top of their scholarships during the league's spring meetings this week.

The idea, which is backed by current NCAA president Mark Emmert and was favored by late NCAA president Myles Brand, is to bridge the gap between what athletic scholarships pay and other expenses like transportation and clothing. That difference has been estimated at between $2,000 to $5,000 per player.

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said league athletic directors and officials have seriously discussed whether they should use some of their growing TV revenue to pay athletes more.

"Forty years ago, you had a scholarship plus $15 a month laundry money," Delany said. "Today, you have the same scholarship, but not with the $15 laundry money.

"How do we get back more toward the collegiate model and a regulatory system that is based more on student-athlete welfare than it is on a level playing field, where everything is about a cost issue and whether or not everybody can afford to do everything everybody else can do?" Delany asked.

Delany stressed that the Big Ten was merely at the discussion stage, but he added the league is interested in talking to other conferences to see if they also favor such a plan. He acknowledged many schools and conferences across the country couldn't afford to cover those additional expenses, which could run about $300,000 a year just for football and men's basketball players alone.

But some Big Ten officials say if they can help out their athletes, then the concept of using the same rules for all teams should be abandoned. Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said the stakes are simply higher for schools like his than for those in the MAC or Sun Belt.

"The reality is, if there's cost of attendance and you can't afford it, don't do it," Smith said. "The teams you're trying to beat can't do it either. Don't do it because Ohio State's doing it. That's one of the things schools at that level get trapped into thinking."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6564134
 

Cut-Throat

Bob Pimp MOBBEN!!!
Apr 25, 2002
7,033
29,861
0
43
#4
Most everyone has lost sight of the fact that these kids are STUDENT-athletes, its there fault that they don't take advantage of a FREE education and end up bein bums once they can't play whatever sport anymore.
And before I hear the "they make colleges millions of dollars" arguement, you need to realize they cost colleges millions of dollars as well in educational expenses plus food and lodging...
 
Oct 3, 2006
5,631
1,842
113
38
#5
I don't think it would happen, I believe the NCAA board has to approve it right? or something like that. It would not be fair to the other conferences when it comes to recruiting.
 

:ab:

blunt_hogg559
Jul 6, 2005
8,149
5,192
0
#7
^ exactly

college sports are a farce. there's too much money being made (by the NCAA signing long term, monster tv deals worth billions, not just colleges making millions).

college sports are basically a farm or minor league, so to speak. the threat of serious injury is very real, so the players should get compensated as such. in european bball and soccer, players can start making money in their teens, which is more reasonable.

ncaa making so much money off of the backs of college athletes aint right. compensate the worker, that's all I'm saying.
 

BAMMER

Siccness Gray Hair
Apr 25, 2002
5,828
479
83
47
Auburn Wa
www.dawgman.com
#8
It wouldnt even be a topic,had it been Minnesota or Wisconsin getting in trouble.Ohio St. makes the conference so much money,so they wanna change the entire complexity of college athletics? What a joke.These dudes need extra money for tat's ? Brand new Chryslers? They get alot more then schooling...try tutors,free food (not the shit sally ngyuen is eating),free housing,free athletic apparel..most of them get a fake income from workin fake jobs that dont exist.I guess its todays America,where everyone wants more.4.0 students cant even get in premier universities,but the punter gets in with a 2.2,and now he wants to be compensated,cuz his 6 digit education isnt enough.smh
 

DUTCH-F.E

Super Moderator
Apr 25, 2002
7,029
8,094
113
43
WWW.myspace.com
#9
I wouldnt say pay them thousands a month. No kid needs that type of money to exist when food, schooling and lodging is provided already. BUT....... Giving a kid a $1,000 on the first of every month will make things easier to deal with. IF that play received his money and got caught selling drugs EXPELLED FOR LIFE. Its simple. You do it in hopes of keeping the kids heads on straight. Thats it.

As much as i dont wanna use the "These kids make the schools so much money" the bottom line is they DO. Its not even debatable. College football makes more money as a whole on TV than any of the major sports. These are facts. So if these kids cost the school $500,000 a year in "salary" oh well... The schools make MILLIONS upon MILLIONS YEARLY of the kids.
 
Jan 18, 2006
14,367
6,557
113
43
#10
I see no problem with endorsements even though that would fuck things up also but no way colleges should be able to pay players. Scandals would totally ruin college football
 

Joey

Sicc OG
Jul 2, 2002
4,090
894
113
44
#11
If this happens get ready for the big 10 to become a fucking powerhouse....

If i was a top recruit i would go where they are gonna pay me.....And alot of top ones will....
 
Nov 1, 2004
2,946
78
48
39
#12
The price of a college education is already inflated. I'm surprised they even considered this seeing as their all about that money. They don't feel bad about putting countless people in debt for a good portion of their lives.
The whole college system is fucked up. There is probably some loop hole in this that makes it worse for the students.
 
Apr 25, 2002
4,446
494
83
#14
The big problem is Title IX cause you'd have to pay everyone including women's ballet dancers the money. So every college athlete gets the scrill, like at a bankrupt school like Cal you're talking about more than 1,000 students. It won't be economically feasible to administer and schools that do will have unfair competitive advantages.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#16
It wouldnt even be a topic,had it been Minnesota or Wisconsin getting in trouble.Ohio St. makes the conference so much money,so they wanna change the entire complexity of college athletics? What a joke.These dudes need extra money for tat's ? Brand new Chryslers? They get alot more then schooling...try tutors,free food (not the shit sally ngyuen is eating),free housing,free athletic apparel..most of them get a fake income from workin fake jobs that dont exist.I guess its todays America,where everyone wants more.4.0 students cant even get in premier universities,but the punter gets in with a 2.2,and now he wants to be compensated,cuz his 6 digit education isnt enough.smh
maybe that applies to star students but what about the 99 percent of student athletes that arent stars? nobody gives a shit about the guys who DONT have an NFL career ahead of them. its easy to lump all the athletes together but not all of them enjoy the perks of being a superstar simply by wearing a jersey.
 
Nov 1, 2004
2,946
78
48
39
#17
I had to do a report about Title IX and womens sports and I came to conclusion that not even women watch womens sports. So fuck Title IX.
Sports that make money should get more money, its that simple. No one gives a shit about La Cross or water polo.
 
Jul 21, 2002
8,158
665
0
42
Oklahoma
www.youtube.com
#19
I see no problem with endorsements even though that would fuck things up also but no way colleges should be able to pay players. Scandals would totally ruin college football
not sure if you're aware of this, but college football is already ruined.

How about this, the alumni pay the players what the alumni think they're worth after each game? A lot of schools already do this anyways. I've heard stories of players at OU and many other schools getting a hat with $100's in the lining of the hat, such as $100 for every tackle they get. Not HUGE money but decent change for playing well and it costs the school nothing. What's the harm in that?
 

BAMMER

Siccness Gray Hair
Apr 25, 2002
5,828
479
83
47
Auburn Wa
www.dawgman.com
#20
maybe that applies to star students but what about the 99 percent of student athletes that arent stars? nobody gives a shit about the guys who DONT have an NFL career ahead of them. its easy to lump all the athletes together but not all of them enjoy the perks of being a superstar simply by wearing a jersey.
You get 85 schollies for your team.id say 55 of them are getting perks like the popular "payed to do nothing" job.I got a handful of friends who had full rides,none with any nfl talent..every one of them had THAT JOB..work a golf course,detail cars..all bullshit.fact is,if your in the 2 deeps,boosters know who you are.im not sayin all these guys get new cars an shit,but they get perks if they want them imo.