|
Replies: 6
| visibility 926
|
Commissioner [907]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 984
Joined: 10/10/11
|
Stipends to college athletes
Oct 23, 2014, 7:04 AM
|
|
are going to be the norm soon. But, all college athletes will not be compensated equally in this regard. Regardless of sport or gender.
I think the line will be drawn with how much money the athlete's sport makes for the university and the athletic department. If football makes 75% of the budget, then 75% of the stipend money should go there. And so on down the line. The scholly part should and will remain how it has always been.
Now I know that tennis, soccer, golf, track players of both sexes will decry this as unfair or descriminatory but that is not the case.
As in the real world, the people who are responsible for bringing in the cash to an organization make the most. If you don't add as much to the coffers, you shouldn't be able to draw as much.
So, with that thought, I think college sports for non-football athletes will probably remain the same. But football, basketball (to a lesser degree), and baseball (even less) will have change.
It really can't be afforded by universities any other way. You can't pay a stipend to the soccer dude the same as the football guy if he accounts for 2% of the revenue made versus 75%. Its just bad business.
And believe me, college sports is BIG BUSINESS!
Discuss?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5082]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5133
Joined: 11/9/09
|
Difference between revenue and profit...
Oct 23, 2014, 7:11 AM
|
|
In most cases the Football program brings in the profit that helps fund the facility upgrades, etc for the lesser revenue generating sports - putting those sports in the red. This whole idea is a big mess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2165]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2744
Joined: 6/12/11
|
I have mixed feelings about this whole thing...
Oct 23, 2014, 7:35 AM
|
|
I don't necessarily think athletes should be compensated because of the revenue the institution makes off of them, but more so because they don't have the normal opportunities that a regular student has. That being said, they are generally getting free educations and have plenty of potential later, but a normal student can work a PT job to have some extra cash. I feel collegiate athletes should get a fair compensation to that of a regular student who is afforded the ability to work since the NCAA prohibits student athletes from working. I think the $10,000 a year is a fair number, and gives a student athlete $833 a month or roughly 208 a week of spending money. That may be a little high in comparison to what a normal student could make working PT while in college, but at least affords a student athlete some money to enjoy the little time they have a way from school and sports. However, paramount in my opinion, is that compensation be the same across the board. Bigger universities should not be allowed to "buy" student athletes, and a tennis player should make the same as a basketball player or football player. Yes, college sport is a big business, but a student athlete is a student athlete and they all face the same rigors of school work, practice, games/matches, etc.. Just my .02.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8244]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7565
Joined: 1/1/11
|
Never gona work
Oct 23, 2014, 7:41 AM
|
|
1st the NCAA either will not or don't want to enforce their rules now
2nd the amount each player gets will not be the same, not because of sport played
schools are not the same UCF has 65,000 students, Texas & ND have the most $$$$$
3rd Ones with Juris Doctor (J.D.) will make the most keeping cases in Federal Courts
(Employment Litigation and Dispute Resolution)
4th players will be going where they will get paid the most
5th smaller schools will have to cut some if not all sports because of cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30764]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 34462
Joined: 6/22/03
|
college athletes get money already. this would
Oct 23, 2014, 8:18 AM
|
|
Just give them more.
Really think about it. College sports started the road to professionalism when they lowered the academic standards to admit non college students.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [9]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 78
Joined: 10/30/12
|
Re: Stipends to college athletes
Oct 25, 2014, 8:23 AM
|
|
Unless CFB spins off into it's own entity I doubt any school could (legally) pay other athletes less. Maybe if they made a stipend a 100% scholarship and they only offered the "red" sports 85% scholarships. They might be able to get away with it that way. Even with some fancy accounting I don't really see a way that this wouldn't end up in court if you were to pay football and men's basketball stipends because women would never have the opportunity the receive those benefits.
The only sports that bring in money at a college are FB and baseball (I wish baseball made more money).
I feel it has to be all or nothing in the current model. Fair or not.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [697]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 501
Joined: 12/29/00
|
Re: Stipends to college athletes
Oct 25, 2014, 8:38 AM
|
|
many already get money, it may not be for their likeness, but I went to college on academic scholarship, I also qualified for grants,(though not need based) I made money going to college because after my tuition, fees were paid, any money not used was disbursed to me. I used the money so I didn't have to work. so those that qualify for full pell or needs based grants get every dime of that money. It may not seem like a lot but full pell is decent. esp when you aren't having to pay for your room and board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 6
| visibility 926
|
|
|
50
