Big Ten Players Demands Out Now

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

How much do you think their education, training, food, medical care, housing, travel, connections for life etc are worth? $0? North of $100k/yr with some suggesting $250k/yr. Who is going to pay for all the other sports that don’t make money (all except football/men’s basketball at P5 schools). If they don’t want to go to school then there are other options already.

You guys keep regurgitating the same tropes over and over. Yes, the athletes get significant value. Cool. But why is there a need to cap their benefits?

Or if we all think underpaying people is the best thing to do, why not implement a rule that caps coaches’ compensation to $200k per year? Arguments in support of capping coaches’s salaries:

• They still get a ton of value from that salary.
• They’ll pay less taxes than if they got paid more.
• Schools can’t afford higher salaries.
• This is just amateur sports.
• Nobody is forcing the coaches to work there. If they don’t like it they can start coaching in their own league.
• I would take that deal in a heartbeat.
• Most people would be lucky to make $200k a year.
• If we pay them more, we’ll have to cut other sports.
• If we pay these coaches more, will we have to pay all coaches the same inflated salaries?

Those arguments sound pretty familiar....

 

[Bulldogs1974]

You guys keep regurgitating the same tropes over and over. Yes, the athletes get significant value. Cool. But why is there a need to cap their benefits?

Or if we all think underpaying people is the best thing to do, why not implement a rule that caps coaches’ compensation to $200k per year? Arguments in support of capping coaches’s salaries:

• They still get a ton of value from that salary.
• They’ll pay less taxes than if they got paid more.
• Schools can’t afford higher salaries.
• This is just amateur sports.
• Nobody is forcing the coaches to work there. If they don’t like it they can start coaching in their own league.
• I would take that deal in a heartbeat.
• Most people would be lucky to make $200k a year.
• If we pay them more, we’ll have to cut other sports.
• If we pay these coaches more, will we have to pay all coaches the same inflated salaries?

Those arguments sound pretty familiar....

You’re not very good at this.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Competitive balance you dolt. The games would mean nothing if one school could just buy everything. As bad as it is now that would ruin the sport. I know you think that was a big gotcha but it was just a dumb thoughtless question.

Paying players would not cause any more competitive imbalance than what already exists. Feel free to read up on it here:

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Hey mr free market look at the g league xfl and other minor league teams. No one wants to watch them. You clearly do not understand what you are talking about.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

The average d1 football coach makes around 2.5 million ( so let’s say he clears about 1.5million after taxes to make him equal to the players) his “employees” are making anywhere from 75k-125k depending on the school. Is it really that big of a gulf? Ceo pay vs 85 “employees” pay isn’t that bad considering they don’t even have a college degree.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

Paying players would not cause any more competitive imbalance than what already exists. Feel free to read up on it here:

View embedded media

Poor data doesn’t make it a “myth”. I’ve course the best players are going to head to warm weather locations with stadiums of 100k people. The talent monopoly would get worse especially in basketball.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

The average d1 football coach makes around 2.5 million ( so let’s say he clears about 1.5million after taxes to make him equal to the players) his “employees” are making anywhere from 75k-125k depending on the school. Is it really that big of a gulf? Ceo pay vs 85 “employees” pay isn’t that bad considering they don’t even have a college degree.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp/college/2016/10/19/texas-football-average-player-worth

 

[Bulldogs1974]

View embedded media

Another piss poor argument. The xfl should flourish quality all those talented players that lose NCAA eligibility. You want to pay players because fans of college athletics are more passionate about their team than they are the players. Players want to go where the fans are. Simple free market. They can go to Europe where fans have no college teams to root for so they are the only shows in town yet players forgo going to Europe for the passion and excitement provided by college fans.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/.amp/college/2016/10/19/texas-football-average-player-worth

Yeah placing a value based on the brand of Texas that they didn’t build doesn’t mean that’s what they bring to the school. Texas would have that player value no matter who was in the jersey.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Yeah placing a value based on the brand of Texas that they didn’t build doesn’t mean that’s what they bring to the school. Texas would have that player value no matter who was in the jersey.

You could say the exact same thing for the Texas coaches. The schools need quality players and quality coaches. The players and coaches also need the school. Just because the school has significant brand value does not mean the quality players do not have significant value.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Another piss poor argument. The xfl should flourish quality all those talented players that lose NCAA eligibility. You want to pay players because fans of college athletics are more passionate about their team than they are the players. Players want to go where the fans are. Simple free market. They can go to Europe where fans have no college teams to root for so they are the only shows in town yet players forgo going to Europe for the passion and excitement provided by college fans.

Rules restricting pay is not conducive to a free market.

College football coaches are allowed to negotiate and be paid free market salaries. College football players are not.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

Rules restricting pay is not conducive to a free market.

College football coaches are allowed to negotiate and be paid free market salaries. College football players are not.

there is no such thing as a free market and they do have a choice. You can choose to go to Europe or some minor league program. If you have a gripe it should be with the nfl. The nfl is the one suppressing competition. If you have a gripe it should be that the nfl should be paying the college players stipend.
On that note mlb is not even free market and their players have arguably the best deal in professional sports.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

there is no such thing as a free market and they do have a choice. You can choose to go to Europe or some minor league program. If you have a gripe it should be with the nfl. The nfl is the one suppressing competition. If you have a gripe it should be that the nfl should be paying the college players stipend.
On that note mlb is not even free market and their players have arguably the best deal in professional sports.

Would you support the NCAA mandating that coaches cannot be paid in excess of $200k?

 

[Bulldogs1974]

Why 200k? In your free market thinking shouldn’t the ceo be making at least 10-20 times the average employee pay?

 

[Bulldogs1974]

What aren’t you beating the drum to pay high school athletes? I’m sure their are high schools pulling in 10-15 grand a game, why not split that up?

 

[Bulldogs1974]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...creased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html
Under our current economic environment college coaches are woefully underpaid compared to the players. Kirk should be making about 27 million

 

[Simbahawk4]

You cant ever pay players. The Pandora's box for doing that is a wild ride of very bad things following in sports and out of sports

They are “student athletes”..”amateur” status not employees of said company filing w-4 forms. Even if ncaa magically could pay players you’d have teammates demanding equal pay creating fire storms compromising team chemistry, not to mention title 9 gender equality..ladies screaming unfair followed with litigation..as you said it’s Pandora’s Box. Total destruction! I’m fine however after the student athlete Graduates and has success at the next level (nfl) to pay royalties on like “images” ie: college jersey, autograph’s, memorabilia.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Why 200k? In your free market thinking shouldn’t the ceo be making at least 10-20 times the average employee pay?

You’re just intentionally missing the point, right?

What you’re arguing for is:

• Capping player compensation? —> Yes
• Capping coach compensation? —> No

Why the inconsistency? If capping player compensation is good, why isn’t it good for coaches?

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

What aren’t you beating the drum to pay high school athletes? I’m sure their are high schools pulling in 10-15 grand a game, why not split that up?

If someone wants to pay high school athletes, why the hell would we care?

Seriously, why are we treating athletes like prostitutes and saying that they can’t be paid for what they do? Why the hell does everyone care so much that athletes not be allowed to profit?

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

They are “student athletes”..”amateur” status not employees of said company filing w-4 forms. Even if ncaa magically could pay players you’d have teammates demanding equal pay creating fire storms compromising team chemistry, not to mention title 9 gender equality..ladies screaming unfair followed with litigation..as you said it’s Pandora’s Box. Total destruction! I’m fine however after the student athlete Graduates and has success at the next level (nfl) to pay royalties on like “images” ie: college jersey, autograph’s, memorabilia.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...creased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html
Under our current economic environment college coaches are woefully underpaid compared to the players. Kirk should be making about 27 million

(1) Look up how much the average NFL coach makes compared to the averages NFL player for a more apt comparison.

(2) If Kirk were really worth $27m per year, there’s no rule preventing Iowa from paying him that much. So this would be an issue for Kirk and his agent. It would not be an issue about changing an NCAA rule.

 

[cidhawkeye]

To understand the premise, we want to create a free market by capping Coach and administration compensation. Did I miss the ‘free market’ part somewhere?

 

[Bulldogs1974]

(1) Look up how much the average NFL coach makes compared to the averages NFL player for a more apt comparison.

(2) If Kirk were really worth $27m per year, there’s no rule preventing Iowa from paying him that much. So this would be an issue for Kirk and his agent. It would not be an issue about changing an NCAA rule.

I didnt say Kirk was worth 27 million. You champion the free market yet fail to realize that the athletes are being paid exceedingly more than they should given, what according to your “free market thinking” says they should. It also says most coaches are underpaid too. Now I don’t believe anyone is getting taken advantage of but people fail to realize the full cost of athletics and why it is there to begin with.
If the bleeding hearts really believe the college athlete is underpaid than the “free market” would have already opened up other avenues for hs graduates to take that aren’t taking advantage of them. They haven’t because they have no value other than what their school brings them.

 

[MepoDawg#]

Paying players would not cause any more competitive imbalance than what already exists. Feel free to read up on it here:

View embedded media

Why are you posting about basketball? This football we’re taking about. Football has 85 scholarships to basketballs 15. Huge difference in being able to bring in more of the 4-5* athletes.

 

[ChiPackHawk]

I enjoy and seek out people who think differently as long as there is actual thought and not regurgitated nonsense about NCAA athletes being Victims. This is just more of the everyone is a victim mentality that has taken over society.

The deal is a free education and celebrity status on campus, many then trade that education for millions of dollars in lifetime earnings using their degree and a future for their family in the middle class. It’s a great freaking deal and one of the best many of these kids will ever get in their life. The majority of schools don’t even make money on their athletic departments for Gods sake and you’re ranting that these kids are being abused in this system? It’s a complete joke. They can hold out or quit if they want but in the long run after a season or two missed there will be millions of kids whose dream was to be in their place and college sports will go on bigger than any minor league pro alternative, and 99% of the kids who quit will regret it in a few years when they’re working a real job and their playing days are gone.

Don't forget preferential class schedules, tutors, essentially unlimited food, per diem when traveling, (yes they get spending money!) etc. The perception that D-1 athletes are "abused" is held only by those who have not experienced it. And you are 100% correct, you hardly need to become a professional athlete to parlay your time at a university into a great life.

 

[Titanhawk2]

As the old saying goes, strike while the iron is hot.

The football players hold the keys to the vehicle now and they are in control due to the NCAA not steering the ship in the right direction with regards to looking out for the student athlete’s financial and physical well being, at the same time making millions of dollars off their backs. It’s time to pay the piper due to the NCAA’s pure and selfish greed when they have had the chance to do the right thing for a very long time but refused to do so.

So everybody, everybody bitches about the NCAA trying to control things too much, but now we want them to control how hundreds of independent institutions go about their sports business, and now blame them for not being controlling enough

 

[HumbleP1e]

Winging it here:

How 'bout we approach it from the opposite of what value can each member of the machine incur, and instead give no value to all participants. In other words, let's keep scholarships as they are. Players will receive no further benefit. But, coaches will also be paid by scholarships for immediate and extended family. Schools will not accrue value but push it back to the infrastructure where players grew up. For example, a portion of the pot of value is given to East St. Louis when a cornerback signs with Missouri. In the long run, this system would improve some of the poorer inner city areas drastically, and the whole nation wins.

 

[hoffmkr]

The average d1 football coach makes around 2.5 million ( so let’s say he clears about 1.5million after taxes to make him equal to the players) his “employees” are making anywhere from 75k-125k depending on the school. Is it really that big of a gulf? Ceo pay vs 85 “employees” pay isn’t that bad considering they don’t even have a college degree.

The other piece to consider:
An average head coach spent between 15 and 25 years coaching before their first head coaching experience. The first 5-10 years often with salary under $50k per year.
They are taking significantly less money, longer hours and high risk to bet on themselves being successful. Even coaches who become high level coordinators end up averaging only a “solid” salary comparable to your accountants, dentists and other successful college graduates.
Also, most head coaches last for 5-7 years at top of their profession, except the truly exceptional ones. Take career earnings for ever ISU, Illinois or Nebraska coach in last 15 years and look at the average yearly rate. Other than Lovie Smith, the rest are a lot less than you think due to years working to HC, then a few years of paydays followed by unemployment.

 

[sbhawk64]

The reason you can never pay college football players is because you would then be subject to pay all athletes in college. You would have to determine their value to the college then pay them accordingly. This would trickle down to non-athletes. Students doing research in the sciences or entertainment in the arts.

Once you start, domino theory begins.

 

[ChiPackHawk]

You guys keep regurgitating the same tropes over and over. Yes, the athletes get significant value. Cool. But why is there a need to cap their benefits?

Or if we all think underpaying people is the best thing to do, why not implement a rule that caps coaches’ compensation to $200k per year? Arguments in support of capping coaches’s salaries:

• They still get a ton of value from that salary.
• They’ll pay less taxes than if they got paid more.
• Schools can’t afford higher salaries.
• This is just amateur sports.
• Nobody is forcing the coaches to work there. If they don’t like it they can start coaching in their own league.
• I would take that deal in a heartbeat.
• Most people would be lucky to make $200k a year.
• If we pay them more, we’ll have to cut other sports.
• If we pay these coaches more, will we have to pay all coaches the same inflated salaries?

Those arguments sound pretty familiar....

Do you really not understand how college athletics work? In your world it appears to be let's just have football, maybe basketball, and screw the 20 other sports. And by the way, socialism doesn't work.

 

[anon_ddojbbh8q7xrt]

Demands seem reasonable

 

[hoffmkr]

There are two major problems in paying “market value”
1) title IX says it’s illegal. Half of all resources must go to equal opportunities. Is there a single women’s team in country that breaks even? NEB volleyball? Women’s basketball? On average, football must support 6-8 women’s teams by law.
2) a majority of football players are worth significantly less than their scholarship over 5 years.
Let’s say a college scholarship is worth $50k per year. Probably really low by most standards but easy to recognize number.
The average player on scout team, special teams, 3rd string gives university $10-$20k yearly value. This means 90%+ of players year 1&2 and over half year 3.
Starters are worth let’s say $100k per year, they generate publicity, but name on front of jersey brings as much as name on back. Then a 5 year player starting 2 years basically breaks even.
Stars are worth more and this guessing. An All-American is probably worth 250k to $500k a year with Heisman finalists a million plus. On average, this is 1-2 players ever four years for schools not Alabama or OSU.
When you do the math and account for transfers, over half players are worth about half a scholarship. 45% probably are worth about what they are getting over 4-5 years. Less than 5% are significantly under compensated.

 

[ChiPackHawk]

The reason you can never pay college football players is because you would then be subject to pay all athletes in college. You would have to determine their value to the college then pay them accordingly. This would trickle down to non-athletes. Students doing research in the sciences or entertainment in the arts.

Once you start, domino theory begins.

The reason you can't pay college players any more than they get paid now (yes - they get some money) is because the profits generated from football pay for nearly every other sport offered. There are only 25ish basketball programs that turn a profit. All others are subsidized. Iowa is fortunate to have a wrestling program that does so well financially. Most don't. It's also why the Big Ten Network is so important and why Rutgers was given the chance to be in the Big Ten. Money to fund ALL sports and programs.

 

[hawkfeever]

You gotta fight for your right...........tooooooooooooo party!

 

[mtown66]

Yes and no. The pac10 demands are ridiculous. However, demanding a safe work environment is something that everyone should strive for during this time of plague.

Plague? What plague? People didn't survive if they caught the plague.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

You champion the free market yet fail to realize that the athletes are being paid exceedingly more than they should given, what according to your “free market thinking” says they should. .

While this may be true for some athletes, it simply is not true for others. For example, if Cam Newton wasn't worth more than the scholarship and other benefits legally provided by Auburn, why did he get paid ~$180,000 in violation of NCAA rules?

If the bleeding hearts really believe the college athlete is underpaid than the “free market” would have already opened up other avenues for hs graduates to take that aren’t taking advantage of them.

The NCAA effectively operates as a cartel to prevent players from getting paid what universities might otherwise pay them. This is antithetical to a free market. By supporting rules that prevent people from freely negotiating benefits, you are not supporting a free market.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

To understand the premise, we want to create a free market by capping Coach and administration compensation. Did I miss the ‘free market’ part somewhere?

The point is that capping salaries of coaches and administrators is antithetical to a free market. Similarly, capping benefits of players is antithetical to a free market.

Nobody has answered why administrators and coaches should benefit from a free market while athletes shouldn't.

 

[mtown66]

First, there are literally hundreds and hundreds of kids, maybe not as talented, for each position that would love to play college football but were not recruited. I'll happily root for whoever wants to play. Second, I would imagine that asking for access to the BTN for family members would be the same as asking for free cable for mom and dad, the brothers and the sisters etc and one for mom and one for dad if they are divorced or otherwise not living together. What does this have to do with safety? That amounts to a conservative $1000 a year per access and some families might need multiples of that. That dog doesn't hunt.
Third, I would NEVER have the WHO be a part of any agreement because they obviously can not be trusted. Many Governors can not be trusted and we all know who they are, but they are what we have.
Fourth, If a player quits football when all else that has been agreed to is being done, it should be a head coaches decision regarding him keeping his scholarship.

 

[MVPFAN]

there is no such thing as a free market and they do have a choice. You can choose to go to Europe or some minor league program. If you have a gripe it should be with the nfl. The nfl is the one suppressing competition. If you have a gripe it should be that the nfl should be paying the college players stipend.
On that note mlb is not even free market and their players have arguably the best deal in professional sports.

Thanks for taking the time to argue with that dip shit.

 

[icantfindausernamethatisntused]

Do you really not understand how college athletics work? In your world it appears to be let's just have football, maybe basketball, and screw the 20 other sports. And by the way, socialism doesn't work.

I'm the one arguing against socialism.

I'm saying the players should be free to negotiate better benefits, and schools should be allowed to provide them if they so choose.

Those who say schools should not be allowed to provide more benefits to top talent are the ones arguing for socialism.