But you're not comparing what football players make to anything. $30k is the minimum for EVERYONE who gets paid. It's very likely that football players would be getting much more than that.
Proposed FBS Subdivision to Directly Pay Players
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
But you're not comparing what football players make to anything. $30k is the minimum for EVERYONE who gets paid. It's very likely that football players would be getting much more than that.
Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
And what I'm saying is that by virtue of Title IX compliance, the maximum amount they'll be compensated is nowhere near what they'd receive if they form a union.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
My son in law is a resident in ear nose and throat surgery. He makes around $70,000 per year and works over 90 hours per week. An actual ENT surgeon makes around $350,000 per year. The Hospital isn't billing less because of that.
Pardon me if I don't feel sorry for players in college that aren't getting paid what a professional is making in the NFL. An college player isn't the same as an NFL player. If that were the case, college football would look just as well played as an NFL game....and...it's not.
The ENT surgeon in residency, isn't the same as one with years of experience either. That's why they get paid less....to learn their craft and have a chance to get out and make more.
So, again, what is the market for a college football player?
Red Five
Well-known member
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
I have no idea. But, the Hospital isn't even who pays them. So....whatever they bring in, it's great for the hospital.
Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
Nothing is stopping your son in law from forming a union with other surgeons in residency. They can negotiate to make less, the same, or more than ENT Surgeons.
College Football players will unionize and negotiate. The market - what fans tune in to watch, how many tune in, what advertises think those eyeballs are worth - will determine their compensation. It could be $1 or it could be $50 million. I've done my best to guess what that will look like and that's the fun of being a fan. But the number is substantial.
Right now, their labor is illegally price fixed. The Supreme Court is going to issue rulings in the very near future on this issue, and if their words on previous cases are any indication, they're going to rule in favor of the players.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
Ha, this might be true.
I see this as an exercise in an old system, outdated and illegal, being done away with. I do think that college football is a quirky and fun sport, but it's been propped up on the backs of free labor where the athletes are artificially prevented from being paid what they're worth.
Now I'm excited that people are now being paid what they're worth. It does end an old, romanticized view of CFB, but that romantic version of CFB had an uncomfortable underbelly of parties enriching themselves off the backs of people that were barred from being paid. It sucks that it's changing, but it's the right thing to do.
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
I guess I'm perplexed why players getting paid is such a bad thing?
If I go see a movie, I don't concern myself with how much Leonardo DiCaprio got paid to film the movie. I just care that he does a good job and the movie is entertaining, and his pay is contingent on making a good movie. His value dictates his price.
The same is true for rock bands, pop singers, painters and computer programmers. CFB players are worth money, they deserve to get it. We don't need to protect an ancient exploitive system coaches and administrators used to enrich themselves. They aren't students and haven't been for a very long time.
Undone
Well-known member
That is what we call a rhetorical question.
I'm mildly amused at my fellow Americans that reject the idea of allowing the concept of fair market value price discovery to occur for college football players. It's here, it's happening, and you're a part of it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Strangelove
Well-known member
Exactly.
We wouldn't expect a prodigy student-actor at UNL to star in a blockbuster movie for free. Or a singer to record an album unpaid. Or anything else just because they're associated with the University. That actor deserves whatever a studio thinks their talent is worth, the singer whatever the record label thinks they're worth. And athletes what TV executives think they are worth.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
International Man of Mystery
They are getting paid. Some people just don't think it's enough.
So, people need to stop arguing..."Players need to be paid". They are.
The argument is how much and how they are to get paid.
And...I deal with things like this all day at work. I have no desire to have my entertainment filled with having the same type of discussions. That's why I don't like pro sports. I despise the whole contract negotiations crap and players leaving for more money and how that affects the team...bla bla bla....
Last edited by a moderator:
gossamorharpy
Well-known member
Couldn't agree more and the analogy you provided is similar to mine. My buddy went to a school with an excellent music program (well known Jazz program and he played Bass) and was paid to travel by the University for shows and events on the road. His course load was lite, room and board covered by University and was receiving checks every 2 weeks based off how many performances, time travel, etc. Double standards abound in the NCAA
Now, back to the more pressing topic. Is Satt getting canned after 1 year?!?!
Husker in WI
Well-known member
So do the kids in sweat shops, doesn't mean they're getting paid what they should.
I understand wanting to focus on the entertainment side of it, and that's fair to do - it's not like we're actually deciding things on a message board. But this probably isn't the thread for you if you don't want to hear about compensation for athletes and what the fair amount is.