Should semipro/college players be paid, or allowed to sell their stuff? (NIL)

[BUCKYLE]

Biggest problem with developing players in the NFL is roster limits. They don't need 5-10 players taking up roster space because they are developing. The NFL doesn't have the benefit of a minor league system, where they can just call up their best prospects at any given time. I'm sorry, but going pro straight out of high school just isn't smart when it comes to football.

Yes, they do. They just don't have to pony up a penny to sustain it. It's called the NCAA. Keep the talent poor, it motivates them. The NFL owners get three to four years of development to scout without paying for a damn thing. They have the best minor league system of all.

 

[TooTall]

Yes, they do. They just don't have to pony up a penny to sustain it. It's called the NCAA. Keep the talent poor, it motivates them. The NFL owners get three to four years of development to scout without paying for a damn thing. They have the best minor league system of all.

Touche...


Still hate you, fucker.

 

[Tanner]

Bottom line, 18 year old kids don't belong in the NFL... If they did, the rule would have changed, and they would be allowed to enter the draft straight out of HS. They aren't ready for the speed of the NFL, Lattimore's leg would have been ripped off had that been Jerome Harrison hitting him. So the argument you are trying to make here just isn't logical.

Health isn't the real reason high school kids can't go pro, but for the sake of discussion, do you feel the same way about boxing, UFC etc? Do you think they should be prohibited from fighting 27 year olds and basically prohibited from making a living until they are 21?

There are some kids who are just fully ready to knock anyone out at age 19. See: Tyson, Mike.

 

[jwinslow]

Health isn't the real reason high school kids can't go pro, but for the sake of discussion, do you feel the same way about boxing, UFC etc? Do you think they should be prohibited from fighting 27 year olds and basically prohibited from making a living until they are 21?

There are some kids who are just fully ready to knock anyone out at age 19. See: Tyson, Mike.

You say that like weight restrictions aren't in play. An extreme outlier doesn't change the rule.

you can work your way up in boxing. Jumping from playing 16-18 year olds, most of which don't have the talent to play d2 ball and will never suit up again to leaping up two levels to playing grown men who weight 50-100 lbs more, bench far more and run faster than almost all if the 170 lb high schoolers is a recipe to destroy a lot of otherwise promising kids.

even the most talented freshman in college football have to adjust to the huge upgrade in speed of college football. I shudder at the thought of them leaping two levels against grown, specialized destroyers.

Could a select few like Clarett do it? Probably, but overall it would be a huge loss in talent as talents like Pryor and Dorial Green Beckham are wasted picks made on potential alone.


The loss of elite talent in college football, and their superior development for years before being asked to go to war against grown men in the NFL, would be a huge loss.


That is without even considering the violent injuries facing undeveloped teenagers.

 

[BigWoof31]

FWIW - the OBC declared at SEC media days that all the coaches in the SEC voted in approval of a proposal to pay each player $300.00/game week, or roughly $3,600/year**

http://www.complex.com/sports/2013/07/steve-spurrier-says-sec-willing-to-pay-players


This is the first unanimous vote the coaches have had on the topic



**This does not mean it's going to start happening, just that if this was approved the the NCAA, this is the amount that the SEC would support, nothing more.

 

[WolverineMike]

I believe Spurrier led the charge on this, and also said they would pay it out of the coaches pocket. Good luck getting coaches in the WAC and the MAC to go along with taking basic salary cuts to pay players. Then you have the problem of coaches with higher salaries wanting to pay players more, so better recruits are going to do what? Follow the money.


They are never going to work out a fair and balanced system. you can't pay players of one sport and not another. Not to mention Title 9 and all the women sports will be wanting to get paid as well. The whole pay for play system in college is a pipe dream that I don't ever see coming to fruition.


Free education
Free room and board
Free meals


seems pretty sweet to me.

 

[Zurp]

I believe Spurrier led the charge on this, and also said they would pay it out of the coaches pocket. Good luck getting coaches in the WAC and the MAC to go along with taking basic salary cuts to pay players. Then you have the problem of coaches with higher salaries wanting to pay players more, so better recruits are going to do what? Follow the money.

He led that charge a year or two ago. Is this the same thing he did, or is this a new one? It was something like he called all of the other coaches of the SEC and he asked whether they were in favor of college football players getting paid. But before they could answer, he told them that he was going to announce who voted against paying players. If you were a recruit, would you want to go play for a coach who is on the record as wanting to pay you, or not wanting to pay you? I think it was a smart move by Captain Smiley.

They are never going to work out a fair and balanced system. you can't pay players of one sport and not another. Not to mention Title 9 and all the women sports will be wanting to get paid as well. The whole pay for play system in college is a pipe dream that I don't ever see coming to fruition.

I don't think equality needs to exist between sports. But I do know that Title 9 would play a role. I don't know how it works, exactly, but I thought it had something to do with percentages of men and women students, and keeping that equal in the resources given to the men and women athletes.

But you're right - paying football players opens the door to having to pay many many more athletes. That may be fine and dandy for Ohio State to do, but is Ball State going to be able to pay ALL the same athletes the same that Ohio State can? Or Northern Illinois? Or Tulsa? Or lots of other teams. The NCAA seems to be about trying to level the playing field between the historical "haves" and the historical "have-nots". Allowing schools to pay their players will only widen that gap. I honestly don't see any problem with that - Take the top 30-40 teams (the ones that can afford to start paying players) and make that the highest division. If you can't afford to pay your players, you need to drop down a division. But... it's not going to happen.

Also - coaches paying players from their own wallets - HA! If paying all of your players for the season comes out to $250,000.00, the coach is just going to ask for a $250,000.00 raise to cover that. It may be officially from the head coach, but it's really coming from the university.

 

[AJHawkfan]

... roughly $3,600/year

85 scholarship players? hmm.... that comes to $306,000 per year. I would like to know how many D1 coaches don't even make $306,000 per year.....

Then how long 'til the student trainers demand payment? I mean, they're the ones keeping the athletes on the playing field so they can earn their $300, right? So technically, THEY'RE the ones making the University all that money.....(the list goes on and one.....)

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Paying players will make the current bad, shady, messy situation infinitely worse. Force the NBA and NFL to set up true minor leagues. That way, a kid coming out of high school has two paths to the pros: the traditional college scholarship or a d-league making 50K a year in Reno or Dubuque.

As an added bonus, watch the arrests, academic fraud and general thuggery plummet in major college football and men's basketball programs.

 

[WolverineMike]

As an added bonus, watch the arrests, academic fraud and general thuggery plummet in major college football and men's basketball programs.

as well as the talent level and overall product

 

[babybuck]

Don't know how to link but a search 'ncaa football finances' includes a result( from USA Today) linking to a chart of schools spending, revenues
and how much of the revenue is subsidized.

OSU uses no subsidy, Ball is over 72% subsidy.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

as well as the talent level and overall product

So what? That would be a small price to pay for cleaning up the cesspool of big money college athletics and the corrupting influence they've brought to American higher education. A few 4 and 5 star illiterates, gang bangers and thugs choosing to go the minor league route will not initiate the death knell of college football--any more than those few basketball players who chose to go straight to the NBA killed college basketball. Good riddance to them.

 

[Bucky32]

PSU defensive end Deion Barnes (@DBarnes_18) puts his thoughts in on Twitter:

The first years I was excited to have myself on NCAA football but now I c they making money off me and everybody on that game, I need a chec

How u gonna say I'm ungrateful when season time come I'm scrambling up my money to get a winter coat?

Y'all keep saying free tuition, I am grateful for that but how much of that goes in our pockets.. What about clothes and living?

 

[Bleed S & G]

Will never happen. Same reason selling your gold pants is a bigger offense than breaking the law; NCAA enjoys a tax exempt status on about $11,000,000,000 annually. Amateur status *is* a big deal.

 

[CentralMOBuck]

PSU defensive end Deion Barnes (@DBarnes_18) puts his thoughts in on Twitter:

How u gonna say I'm ungrateful when season time come I'm scrambling up my money to get a winter coat?

Y'all keep saying free tuition, I am grateful for that but how much of that goes in our pockets.. What about clothes and living?

I don't know how many athletes I saw walking around Mizzou's campus decked out in gear that was given to them for free. I'm calling BS on this.