Kendall Gregory-McGhee is suing the NCAA, SEC, ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-12

Donate To GopherHole
Pompous Elitist said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You guys are cheering for the destruction of amateur college athletics.

If you want to watch professional athletes, cheer for the NFL!

The profits from college athletics SHOULD be rolled back into the core mission of the member universities: education.

I'm really disappointed with what I've been seeing from both the students, the NCAA, and the college administrators. Not to mention a lot of posters here on Gopherhole. Think about unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

Amateur athletics is a sham. The sooner it is gone the better. The NCAA created the idea for selfish economic reasons, not for altruism. Goodbye amateurism.
 

I don't think it is a slippery slope if they just cap the scholarship at cost of attendance. I don't think it is fair to fund the scholarship below cost of attendance and then put restrictions on athletes having jobs that they don't for other students.

In addition, I would advocate for protecting scholarships, or at least ensuring access to financial aid, for those who are in good standing but have not completed their degree in 4 years and have exhausted eligibility or were not asked back for a 5th. This is reasonable because athletes often have to take lighter class schedules in season or may have schedule conflicts that prevent them from enrolling in certain classes.

That, and creating a system to determine eligibility for ongoing medical care on an injury by injury basis (similar to the VA Service Connected designation) and then funding it at an NCAA level, should be more than reasonable.

I think a union, yes, would be a slippery slope and could lead to a lot of ugly overreaching and infighting.
 


Ok, cap practice hrs at the same level as women's rowing. Problem solved? No longer "slaves"?

Pressure NFL to remove restrictions on underclassmen declaring for draft. Problem solved?

Ok, let me make it simple. If this were the baseball players lobbying for their cut of the revenue would you feel the same way? Is it just the dollar amounts that have you all wound up?

Are you advocating for high school players to demand their cut of ticket sales and concessions? How far and how ridiculous do you want to go with this ranting?

Again, the amount necessary to meet the needs of all student athletes is enormous.
 

Catechol, perhaps the schools can take out a generous disability insurance (if they don't already). Seems to be a reasonable recruiting tool (and the right thing to do).

All Americans, even if income-less are eligible for health care. Name any high-risk occupation, non-government, that provides lifetime private health insurance coverage. Futhermore, it is difficult for most ex-military to get full service connected disability.

Do high school kids get lifetime medical coverage? Nfl players, despite their bargaining clout don't get that.
 


Gopherguy0723 said:
Amateur athletics is a sham. The sooner it is gone the better. The NCAA created the idea for selfish economic reasons, not for altruism. Goodbye amateurism.
Click to expand...

Can you explain to us why you are a fan? Are you a fan? How did you become interested in college athletics??
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Ok, cap practice hrs at the same level as women's rowing. Problem solved? No longer "slaves"?

Pressure NFL to remove restrictions on upperclassmen declaring for nfl. Problem solved?

Ok, let me make it simple. If this were the baseball players lobbying for their cut of the revenue would you feel the same way? Is it just the dollar amounts that have you all wound up?

Are you advocating for high school players to demand their cut of ticket sales and concessions? How far and how ridiculous do you want to with this ranting?

Again, the amount necessary to meet the needs of all student athletes is enormous.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about making a full ride scholarship actually cover the cost of attendance. I'm not talking about increasing the number of scholarships. I'm not advocating student-athletes receive a cut of the revenue. Simply provide without limitations everyday essentials and pay for all tuition and fees related to attendance. You've obviously had this discussion with others previously because you are arguing points that I'm not making.
 


cjcarter8 said:
True. That alternative doesn't currently exist.
Click to expand...

So it's the NCAA's fault the NFL doesn't have a minor league? I'm not saying I disagree that athletes shouldn't be able to get health insurance, etc. paid for, but KGM knew what the deal was when he signed up. He hardly played and still got a full ride (tuition, room, board, food, athletic gear). Not a bad deal for him - I don't understand how he thinks he can sue the NCAA.
 



cjcarter8 said:
I'm talking about making a full ride scholarship actually cover the cost of attendance. I'm not talking about increasing the number of scholarships. I'm not advocating student-athletes receive a cut of the revenue. Simply provide without limitations everyday essentials and pay for all tuition and fees related to attendance. You've obviously had this discussion with others previously because you are arguing points that I'm not making.
Click to expand...

And again...that amount is a very large sum. Multiply the number you're thinking of by 450,000.

Why is this a problem now? What have athletes done to scrape by these last 100+ years.

Ok, cap practice hrs. Allow work-study or other jobs. Will that quiet the mob?
 

Folks don't seem to consider the ways in which college athletes are compensated. Most college attendees must take out massive loans. Athletes do not. Yet we have some here that assume they are suffering. Why? Like Dpo said......they voluntarily sign on to play. Don't like the free education? Don't take it. How about this? Play at an institution that has lower costs. That's the issue, right? Not all colleges have the same costs? Simple fix.

I don't want to see college athletics turn into a larger arms race. Paying college athletes is a slippery slope. Who gets what? Are football scholarships equal to other athletic scholarships? Do the helmet schools simply outbid the smaller schools? These are questions that have no answers. The scales are already tipped towards the blue bloods and the helmet schools.

I've always thought that college athletes should probably be given a small subsidy. They need a discretionary budget. However, it shouldn't fund extravagant clothing and tattoos.
 

cjcarter8 said:
Those are not realistic alternatives to college football.
Click to expand...

And? 1.7% play pro football. That would tell me it's not designed for feeding the NFL, it's to create college graduates and create college graduates that don't play football. Since 70% of football players and 82% of all athletes graduate, I'd say its doing a GREAT job.

65% of all college students graduate. I wonder how much lower that would be if football wasn't generating scholarships and aid for non-athletes.
 




Pompous Elitist said:
And again...that amount is a very large sum. Multiply the number you're thinking of by 450,000.

Why is this a problem now? What have athletes done to scrape by these last 100+ years.

Ok, cap practice hrs. Allow work-study or other jobs. Will that quiet the mob?
Click to expand...

There aren't 450,000 full ride scholarships given in college sports. For example a D1 baseball team only has 11.7 scholarships for the whole team. That's not enough to field an entire baseball team. So obviously while there may be full ride scholarship players on the team the whole team doesn't have a full ride.

You're acting like I'm saying let these kids hit the free market and go to the highest bidder. I will state this again I am opposed to paying student athletes. I am merely suggesting an increase in scholarship coverage.

Just because it wasn't addressed for 100 years doesn't mean it wasn't a problem. Women couldn't vote before 1920 does that mean it wasn't a problem until then?
 

DoubleB said:
I am so over the college players wanting more. to me the bottom line is give them schooling and some health coverage after college for any medical needs that might have been from their playing days(if they do not go to the NFL) if a player goes to the NFL then there should be a repayment of the $100,000.00-$150,000.00 of the scholarship monies they earned while attending college over a time of say 10 years. and that money could pay the helath benefits of the players not fortunate to continue playing the game of football.
do any average football players really think they are worth more that the $150,000.00(based on 5 years of 30,000.00) they are already getting?
Click to expand...

LOL this is the best post ever, make kids repay their scholarship if they succeed, why stop at athletes, should make all kids who get a good job after college repay any scholarships they had, and those who drop out and what not dont have to worry about it.

Sent from my LIFE PLAY using Tapatalk
 

afurry91 said:
If the NCAA were to pay the players, then there are way better athletes that schools could get. I'm sure the CFL players would love to come over here and get an education.

Pay the players and get better ones in the process. Leave the 18 year old entitled brats to the wolves.
Click to expand...

??? You do realize most the cfl players played college ball right? You don't think NCAA is getting the best available eligible players right now because they don't pay? Where are these better players that schools can go after that they can't now?

Sent from my LIFE PLAY using Tapatalk
 

GuyFawkes said:
??? You do realize most the cfl players played college ball right? You don't think NCAA is getting the best available eligible players right now because they don't pay? Where are these better players that schools can go after that they can't now?

Sent from my LIFE PLAY using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

They aren't eligible because they're getting paid. If you make the NCAA a pro league by paying them, then there are much better athletes that you can get. Go get Euro athletes, go get CFL players. You don't think there are better "pro" athletes around those leagues than the guys that go to Utah State or Minnesota?
 

afurry91 said:
They aren't eligible because they're getting paid. If you make the NCAA a pro league by paying them, then there are much better athletes that you can get. Go get Euro athletes, go get CFL players. You don't think there are better "pro" athletes around those leagues than the guys that go to Utah State or Minnesota?
Click to expand...

Doubt NCAA will outbid pro leagues, but yea, if they can get someone off a pro team, than go after them, and then the kids that miss out because of it can go to those pro teams and take their spots. NCAA will likely keep their eligibility requirements even if they compensate players.

I honestly think the best way around this since not all players are worth the same, is to go in the direction of sponsoring, set something up where players can get sponsored, but everything has to go through the NCAA and there has to be limits set up in place on how much they can make and or how they get marketed. NCAA makes a ton off marketing these players so its only fair if they get their share.

Sent from my LIFE PLAY using Tapatalk
 

stocker08 said:
Folks don't seem to consider the ways in which college athletes are compensated. Most college attendees must take out massive loans. Athletes do not. Yet we have some here that assume they are suffering. Why? Like Dpo said......they voluntarily sign on to play. Don't like the free education? Don't take it. How about this? Play at an institution that has lower costs. That's the issue, right? Not all colleges have the same costs? Simple fix.

I don't want to see college athletics turn into a larger arms race. Paying college athletes is a slippery slope. Who gets what? Are football scholarships equal to other athletic scholarships? Do the helmet schools simply outbid the smaller schools? These are questions that have no answers. The scales are already tipped towards the blue bloods and the helmet schools.

I've always thought that college athletes should probably be given a small subsidy. They need a discretionary budget. However, it shouldn't fund extravagant clothing and tattoos.
Click to expand...

Wow. You really are not getting this. The education they are receiving is not free. Scholarship amounts are not equal across all schools. So simply going to a cheaper school would not solve the problem. The scholarships pay for 90-95% of the cost of attending the school. I'm simply saying make it cover 100% of the cost associated with attending the school. No stipend. No pay for play. No free market system creating a pay disparity in locker room.
 

highwayman said:
And? 1.7% play pro football. That would tell me it's not designed for feeding the NFL, it's to create college graduates and create college graduates that don't play football. Since 70% of football players and 82% of all athletes graduate, I'd say its doing a GREAT job.

65% of all college students graduate. I wonder how much lower that would be if football wasn't generating scholarships and aid for non-athletes.
Click to expand...

You missed the point I was trying to make. My point is simply what mechanism is there to make the NCAA increase or alter scholarship aid for student athletes. The NCAA enjoys a monocratic rule over college sports and the rules it enforces over student athletes. There is no checks and balance system on the NCAA. There's a direct conflict of interest when the NCAA is expected to make rules and policies that will negatively affect its pocket book. And because of this the only route to address an issue is a lawsuit.
 

U really think if they start paying players there are going to be 85 man rosters? No they will cut that down maybe to 60 or 70... now 15 to 20 kids who are not going pro.. will lose out on a good education.... They will either have to cut every sport other than football and basketball that will not happen sorry.
 

gopherhoopsguy said:
U really think if they start paying players there are going to be 85 man rosters? No they will cut that down maybe to 60 or 70... now 15 to 20 kids who are not going pro.. will lose out on a good education.... They will either have to cut every sport other than football and basketball that will not happen sorry.
Click to expand...

You're right paying student athletes is a bad idea. Making a full ride scholarship actually cover the cost of attendance is a viable idea. Besides if the NCAA allows the cutting of sports and opportunities for young men and women, the NCAA has failed its entire membership. Universities having to cut sports would be a direct example of the NCAA being more concerned with money than the success of it member institutions and the student-athletes.
 

cjcarter8 said:
Shoot guys I'm so glad I'm getting raked over the coals because the NCAA as an organization only makes 800 million dollars a year and not the billion that I stated.
Click to expand...

Actually you said "BILLIONS", not a billion. Just thought I would point that out.

I agree that the scholarships should be paid at 100% and there should be some kind of better medical system for players who get hurt, but that is probably as far as it should go for me.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Actually you said "BILLIONS", not a billion. Just thought I would point that out.

I agree that the scholarships should be paid at 100% and there should be some kind of better medical system for players who get hurt, but that is probably as far as it should go for me.
Click to expand...

Sorry I missed the "s". Was supposed to say billions. Quote my whole post and you'll see there are billions of dollars going through college sports a year. I should've said college sports instead of NCAA. That's my fault but my point remains the same.

I'm not too familiar with the medical portion. Is the proposal to cover injuries that occur during their college career or issues that may surface at a later date as a result of their participation in college sports? From the surface, it looks like determining a proper medical system for former players will be a more difficult process. Determining what is and isn't covered could be a source of contention. But I agree, I don't like the thought of any more drastic changes to the system.
 

Ok, I'm stumped. What expenses are they facing that should be covered? Can we put a dollar amount on this in an average college town?

There are 138000 or so scholarship students. But if athletes are classified as employees wont they need to all be compensated regardless of division? There are at minimum, minimum wage laws, health care costs, etc.

Assuming we stick with the student athlete angle rather than the athlete as employee angle....Are we talking 200, 300, 500 per month for discretionary use? That money will either need to come from NCAA revenue or from the school. Sabah would need to take a pay cut...
 

cjcarter8 said:
Sorry I missed the "s". Was supposed to say billions. Quote my whole post and you'll see there are billions of dollars going through college sports a year. I should've said college sports instead of NCAA.
Click to expand...

How about the BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of bucks wagered on college football and college basketball in Vegas and elsewhere around the country above board and below board? Just think of all the money wagered on THAT "tournament" that was just completed. And, can you imagine how much extra gambling money that will change hands with a football playoff series to crown a national champion? The Gross Domestic Product is massively influenced in one way or another on the backs of these college student athletes.

And NONE of it would happen without these student athletes.

Believe me: the Mafia and organized crime might not be as healthy as these now "too legit to quit..." organizations run casinos and gambling opportunities that do a hell of a business making book on college football and college basketball games!.

College football and college basketball helps fuel the gambling industry.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Ok, I'm stumped. What expenses are they facing that should be covered? Can we put a dollar amount on this in an average college town?

There are 138000 or so scholarship students. But if athletes are classified as employees wont they need to all be compensated regardless of division? There are at minimum, minimum wage laws, health care costs, etc.

Assuming we stick with the student athlete angle rather than the athlete as employee angle....Are we talking 200, 300, 500 per month for discretionary use? That money will either need to come from NCAA revenue or from the school. Sabah would need to take a pay cut...
Click to expand...

You sure are hung up on union fear and loathing! Well pompous one: "...you can't scare me I'm sticking to the union..."
 

I'm actually a big union fan. My father was a union leader and I grew up in a union household. Their union is still going strong. It's about cultivating good relationships and gasp, being reasonable and realistic about the mathematics of a given situation. That's hard.

The problem with many unions is that over time management and union greed kills the golden goose. We see it time and again.

I'd hate to see that happen to my favorite sport. All I see here is a lot of blind greed by both parties. It's sad.
 

dpodoll68 said:
I'm going to sue my employer because they give me exactly what they promised they would, and exactly what I agreed to. They didn't see fit to give me more than I agreed to, so now I'm going to sue.
Click to expand...

If your employer coordinated with other companies in their field in an effort to keep down the wages of you and your coworkers you could have a case.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Ok, I'm stumped. What expenses are they facing that should be covered? Can we put a dollar amount on this in an average college town?

There are 138000 or so scholarship students. But if athletes are classified as employees wont they need to all be compensated regardless of division? There are at minimum, minimum wage laws, health care costs, etc.

Assuming we stick with the student athlete angle rather than the athlete as employee angle....Are we talking 200, 300, 500 per month for discretionary use? That money will either need to come from NCAA revenue or from the school. Sabah would need to take a pay cut...
Click to expand...

The NCAA and most college financial aid offices define cost of attendance as the total cost of tuition and fees, room and board, books and supplies, transportation and other expenses related to attendance at the institution.”

The average difference between a full ride scholarship and cost of attendance is approximately $3,000 per year. There are only 6 "head count"sports (FBS football, M & W basketball, W volleyball, W gymnastics and W tennis)where one athlete equals one full scholarship. The rest are "equivalency" sports where the team receives a set number of scholarship and it's up to the coach how they are divided (i.e. D1 baseball teams get 11.7 scholarships). The likelihood of a full scholarship in an equivalency sport appears slim.

So at minimum an FBS football school (FCS football is an equivalency sport capped at 63 scholarships) is looking at 145 full ride scholarships. So increasing a scholarship to cover the cost of attendance would cost a university approximately $435,000/year. Keep in mind this is an average number.

In fact there are even ways for schools to exercise some cost avoidance, such as, require athletes to live on campus (minimize/eliminate transportation costs), supply clothes, school supplies and other necessities (in exchange for supplier sponsoring athletic department) and feed the kids all they want on campus (universities already have food service contracts).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom