A College Football Player's Salary Vs. Mine

[coastereight]

.................

Edited February 28, 2015 by coastereight

[Parseghians theorem]

I make significantly less than this:

http://financialaid.nd.edu/undergraduate/cost_of_attendance/

 

Just saying...

 

I think it's amazing that people actually feel bad for these athletes.

 

great post. sell the jersey numbers that is fine. but maybe schools cut back on selling hawaiin lei tshirts and dont sell johnny football shirts.

 

if you start paying players, no more free school.

[1qa]

I think there's some denial here. You all seem to feel the schollie should be the end and be all.

 

But, if you can negotiate more than the schollie, why not...

 

Some will play for schollie, some will pay for nothing at all, and some... can play for schollie and more. WHY NOT.

 

It's not about feeling sorry for anyone. It's called free enterprise.

[Parseghians theorem]

paying players causes problems. more problems than we have now. the rules are in place to create as equal of playing field as possible.

 

if you can pay players to come to your school, some programs will never be relevant again. some programs just couldnt pay as much. and what if a player got $10000 to come to school and another in his class got $50000? but the 10000 player won the heisman as a freshman? do you get a raise. there is no end to this without it becoming a professional sport.

 

play football, get free education, go to NFL and get paid there.

 

just about every suggestion to pay players comes with some larger problem.

Edited September 14, 2013 by Parseghian's theorem

[Phillydomer]

I think there's some denial here. You all seem to feel the schollie should be the end and be all.

 

But, if you can negotiate more than the schollie, why not...

 

Some will play for schollie, some will pay for nothing at all, and some... can play for schollie and more. WHY NOT.

 

It's not about feeling sorry for anyone. It's called free enterprise.

 

You've missed the whole boat: it is not free enterprise, it is amateur athletics. The fact that schools exploit athletes does not mean that paying athletes solves the problem. Two wrongs don't make a right. The right step is for schools to stop exploiting athletes. The likelihood that this happens is of course next to zero.

[Franco]

You should add the TONS of food each player gets

 

It costs a lot of money to eat healthy, especially in the amounts that elite athletes need

[Incurorish]

These kids get more than enough.

 

1. Thousands of dollars worth of shoes, attire, etc...

2. Free college education.

3. An opportunity to compete for a shot at the next level.

4. The chance to contribute to the spirit of your school and the acknowledgement that follows.

5. The individual attention that comes as a college athlete... special nutrition programs, specialized tutoring and other perks.

 

I don't really like how the NCAA profits from these kids as much as they do, but I do realize that a lot of these football programs are what pay the bills for other sports.

[1qa]

It is not just free agency to the highest bidder... as i've said in other threads, the expectation is that schools actually graduate their athletes... and that is not happening now... except for ND, Duke, Vandy, Wake & Service Academies.

 

Unfortunately, it's not about the education for too many... and that's the fundamental problem.

 

I advocate punishing schools that don't graduate students by limiting their schollie / roster sizes, not a 1 to 5 schollies/roster size hit, but with 10% to 40% impact.

 

Right now, athletes already have limited options... and it would remain so even if kids had the extra option to get money. As I see it, the smartest students / best athletes have their choice of schools... the dumbest students / weakest athletes have the least choice, if any at all... and then there's everyone in between.

 

Schools offer based on the requirements of their school, and the needs of the team.

 

Ability to earn a little cash in addition to a schollie is a variable that applies to few students.

[1qa]

Also, pricing the schollie is not really relevant as a cost.

 

ALL schollie athletes get a schollie, whether it's worth $10000 a year, or $50000 a year... makes no difference... it's money the never see, so it is equivalent.

 

The value of ND over other schools is not the cost of the schollie, but the community you build and the network you have when you leave.

 

That value would still be there whether some kid in Tuscaloosa gets some cashola or not.

[BlackIrish42]

I make significantly less than this:

http://financialaid.nd.edu/undergraduate/cost_of_attendance/

 

Just saying...

 

I think it's amazing that people actually feel bad for these athletes.

 

You are worth significantly less, according to the marketplace. This post fuels my believe that so much of the rancor towards paying exploited athletes is down to simple human envy...

[Jim2Dokes]

I think there's some denial here. You all seem to feel the schollie should be the end and be all.

 

But, if you can negotiate more than the schollie, why not...

 

Some will play for schollie, some will pay for nothing at all, and some... can play for schollie and more. WHY NOT.

 

It's not about feeling sorry for anyone. It's called free enterprise.

 

Your are not looking at this logically. Say AM pays Manziel extra and his center nothing. How's that going to work? His oline is gonna be pissed receivers are gonna drop the balls on purpose ext. Now lets look at it from an injury prospective. Say starting QB comes out of Hs gets his extra money and never sees a day on the field due to injury. Now the school is on the hook for his "salary". But wait! Its not the school it is you as the tax payer for a state school or fan. So now you pay higher price for your tickets due to a 5 star QB that never sees the field. Use the same analogy for performance issues. 5 star QB comes in ends up be Dayne Crist and is horrible. you as the taxpayer/fan are paying for him to sit on the bench. Meanwhile a 3 star comes lets say Rees who is making nothing. There are so many more varibles on why this could never work I could get in to.

[BlackIrish42]

Your are not looking at this logically. Say AM pays Manziel extra and his center nothing. How's that going to work? His oline is gonna be pissed receivers are gonna drop the balls on purpose ext. Now lets look at it from an injury prospective. Say starting QB comes out of Hs gets his extra money and never sees a day on the field due to injury. Now the school is on the hook for his "salary". But wait! Its not the school it is you as the tax payer for a state school or fan. So now you pay higher price for your tickets due to a 5 star QB that never sees the field. Use the same analogy for performance issues. 5 star QB comes in ends up be Dayne Crist and is horrible. you as the taxpayer/fan are paying for him to sit on the bench. Meanwhile a 3 star comes lets say Rees who is making nothing. There are so many more varibles on why this could never work I could get in to.

 

Yes, cuz in the real world that you are supposedly preparing them for, everyone makes the same amount of money. Great post!

[Jim2Dokes]

Yes, cuz in the real world that you are supposedly preparing them for, everyone makes the same amount of money. Great post![/quote

 

That's exactly why there is college footbal in the NFLs eyes you get to prove what your worth! You can not tell me anyone can predict what a HS students worth is versus another in most cases. If we start paying college students why shouldn't competitive high schools like in Texas and Flordia who have big local donors be able to pay for athletes to come to their school?

 

Why stop there programs in the SEC will start making parennts mortgage payments when a kid is 10 so that he comes to their school. Many schools recuit middle schoolers why not pay them through their parents in the meantime. It would never end, the pandoras box paying athletes free market style would open up.

Edited September 14, 2013 by Jim2Dokes

[Phillydomer]

Yes, cuz in the real world that you are supposedly preparing them for, everyone makes the same amount of money. Great post!

 

We have paid athletes already: it's called the NFL. I'm interested in rooting for amateurs who go to class, study, and have pride in their university, which is why I watch college. Paying athletes more than a scholarship completely alters the nature of the sport and I dare anyone to say otherwise.

This is not a defense of universities' exploitation of athletes, which is indefensible; but it is a way of saying that paying athletes does not resolve the issue, it only exacerbates it.

[UnifiedIrish]

paying players causes problems. more problems than we have now. the rules are in place to create as equal of playing field as possible.

 

if you can pay players to come to your school, some programs will never be relevant again. some programs just couldnt pay as much. and what if a player got $10000 to come to school and another in his class got $50000? but the 10000 player won the heisman as a freshman? do you get a raise. there is no end to this without it becoming a professional sport.

 

play football, get free education, go to NFL and get paid there.

 

just about every suggestion to pay players comes with some larger problem.

 

You're exactly right in that it will cause more problems. Now you have to keep track of every money transaction and make sure that it is being appropriated correctly. This just opens up all new ways of cheating that some will be better at than others in how they doctor the books.

 

The other questions I have is what about all the other athletic programs? Do they get paid? And I mean every program, across the board and across the divisions, ie. D2 schools and so on. What about those who cannot afford to pay all the programs and just some of the programs?