Delaney Proposes NCAA Reforms

[Mavric]

Via ESPN:

Point 1: An educational trust

 

Delany would like to see schools commit to allowing athletes to return to school after their playing days if they did not finish their bachelor's degree. If said athlete chooses to do so, the school would pick up the tab for the rest of that player's education.

 

Point 2: Time commitments

 

Delany recognizes the 20-hour rule for athletes during the season is not realistic. He spoke to his coaches about juggling that and being a full-time student.

Point 3: The at-risk student

 

Delany stopped short of calling for freshmen to return to being ineligible in their first year, but he appears to be in favor of a hybrid model, where students who are "at-risk" would get a year of residence in college while giving them their four years of eligibility and a scholarship.

 

Point 4: Miscellaneous expenses

 

This is a topic Delany has mentioned for two years now, essentially a look at being able to pay athletes a stipend in addition to their scholarship "up to the cost of education." The Big Ten commissioner, though, isn't sure what that number would be.

 

Delany wants to make sure any stipend would be Title IX compliant, so all male and female athletes on full scholarship are eligible for the same benefits.

 

"I'm talking about a stipend of miscellaneous expense that meets Title IX rules and federal law," Delany said. "And no exemptions for football and basketball."

[Kiyoat Husker]

Hard to argue against any of these initiatives. All are pro-student-athlete, and I agree with that, at least on face value. Your sport is your full time job for most of these athletes, and very few of them get a big payoff after college. I had to take out large loans to pay for college that I am still paying off, but I was also allowed to work and make money while i went to school.

 

This is also great pub for Delaney and the B1G, which I think may have been the point.

 

Stipends and additional scholorship perks also favor larger schools with big athletic budgets. Hmmm.

[Count 'Bility]

I've had a recent history of flip-flopping on a lot of principles since being on Huskerboard. Reading other perspectives and understanding opposite points of view instead of stubbornly standing on my own soapbox. This is another one of those issues. I used to be the "they get school paid for. That's a plenty crowd". But seeing how some have to live in college while doing so, especially those without wealthy parents, and then going into a store and seeing a jersey with a number on it that I have to pay 80 bucks for has really swayed my opinion. I'm not saying they need contracts and signing bonuses, but christ, give the guys 400 bucks a week so they can at least live a little. I know it wouldnt be fair to other non athletes, but they have to look at all the advantages they have from the money that athletics have brought to the University and city over the years.

[Mavric]

I've changed my mind somewhat on this too. And I'll be surprised if the NCAA doesn't lose a good chunk of their argument in the lawsuit so something is probably going to change.

 

I can see giving them some decent "stipend" but I'm not sure where that line will be. The really interesting thing will be to see how it ends up having to apply to other sports. I'm sure it will never fly to only pay football and men's basketball players so do you have to give something to every athlete? The same to every athlete, regardless of sport? That could really start to undo a lot of the parity that has come about in the last 20+ years with scholarship limits and such.

[Landlord]

Agreed on all points except for the stipend, which I vehemently disagree with entirely.

 

 

Student-athletes already have access to plenty of cash and products/services that nobody else does. This article sums it up perfectly. It's an absolute joke and insult to the idea of amateur athletics that this is being considered seriously.

 

http://www.holyturf.com/2011/05/football-players-receive-17000-annually-in-cash-all-within-ncaa-rules/

 

The typical non-freshman Arkansas football player received the cash listed below in 2010-11:

$5,500- Pell Grant

$500- Clothing Fund

$8,024- Fall and Spring Room and Board

$3,016- Summer Room and Board

 

$17,040- Grand Total

 

Remember, this excludes any money from the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund, the Special Assistance Fund, and any occasional meals provided by boosters. Monthly, football players are looking at $1,420 cash in their pocket without having to buy books or pay tuition and fees. Did you have $1,420 of cash every month in college? If football players were to work a job paying a respectable $10 an hour, they would need to work 36 hours a week for 50 weeks to make $1,420 before taxes to make what they get from their football scholarship and other available money sources.

[Mavric]

I guess I thought your $400 per week was basically a stipend (or whatever you want to call it, thus the quotes).

 

I just think the NCAA will end up having to pay something after the lawsuit. Whatever you call it is irrelevant. It's just a matter of who gets it and how much.

 

Another thought just occurred to me: If the current lawsuit says every athlete gets the same, will there be another lawsuit but the football and men's basketball all-american caliber players saying they should get more???

[Kiyoat Husker]

I've changed my mind somewhat on this too. And I'll be surprised if the NCAA doesn't lose a good chunk of their argument in the lawsuit so something is probably going to change.

 

I can see giving them some decent "stipend" but I'm not sure where that line will be. The really interesting thing will be to see how it ends up having to apply to other sports. I'm sure it will never fly to only pay football and men's basketball players so do you have to give something to every athlete? The same to every athlete, regardless of sport? That could really start to undo a lot of the parity that has come about in the last 20+ years with scholarship limits and such.

 

I think this is Delaney's motivation, or at least part of it. This would favor Nebraska and the B1G greatly.

[mrandyk]

I've changed my mind somewhat on this too. And I'll be surprised if the NCAA doesn't lose a good chunk of their argument in the lawsuit so something is probably going to change.

 

I can see giving them some decent "stipend" but I'm not sure where that line will be. The really interesting thing will be to see how it ends up having to apply to other sports. I'm sure it will never fly to only pay football and men's basketball players so do you have to give something to every athlete? The same to every athlete, regardless of sport? That could really start to undo a lot of the parity that has come about in the last 20+ years with scholarship limits and such.

 

I think this is Delaney's motivation, or at least part of it. This would favor Nebraska and the B1G greatly.

While bringing college football one more giant step closer to being as boring as the NFL.

[ZRod]

I'm torn on this issue, I honestly don't think student athletes should be getting a stipend just for being athletes. They are already getting a full ride to college and the ability to make a comfortable living after they graduate, with basically zero debt. Which is a great opportunity that most people don't get. If they want extra spending money then get a summer job like every other student, hell Marcel Jones used to work at the Grand in Lincoln. But the universities and NCAA to a certain extent are profiting of their image and likeness with jersey sales and what not like Accountability said and I don't think that is really fair.

 

If you really want to give out stipends though your going to open up a huge can of worms! No matter how you split it someone is going to come out on the losing end. If you set a standard rate then when you factor in cost of living some athletes will be getting payed more than others. On the other hand if you do factor in cost of living, then the outward appearance is that some schools will be "paying" their athletes more and that's going to cause a huge sh#t storm when it's a prominent or dominant school.

[Landlord]

I'm torn on this issue, I honestly don't think student athletes should be getting a stipend just for being athletes. They are already getting a full ride to college and the ability to make a comfortable living after they graduate, with basically zero debt. Which is a great opportunity that most people don't get. If they want extra spending money then get a summer job like every other student, hell Marcel Jones used to work at the Grand in Lincoln. But the universities and NCAA to a certain extent are profiting of their image and likeness with jersey sales and what not like Accountability said and I don't think that is really fair.

 

If you really want to give out stipends though your going to open up a huge can of worms! No matter how you split it someone is going to come out on the losing end. If you set a standard rate then when you factor in cost of living some athletes will be getting payed more than others. On the other hand if you do factor in cost of living, then the outward appearance is that some schools will be "paying" their athletes more and that's going to cause a huge sh#t storm when it's a prominent or dominant school.

 

 

 

Agreed on all points except for the stipend, which I vehemently disagree with entirely.

 

 

Student-athletes already have access to plenty of cash and products/services that nobody else does. This article sums it up perfectly. It's an absolute joke and insult to the idea of amateur athletics that this is being considered seriously.

 

http://www.holyturf....hin-ncaa-rules/

 

The typical non-freshman Arkansas football player received the cash listed below in 2010-11:

$5,500- Pell Grant

$500- Clothing Fund

$8,024- Fall and Spring Room and Board

$3,016- Summer Room and Board

 

$17,040- Grand Total

 

Remember, this excludes any money from the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund, the Special Assistance Fund, and any occasional meals provided by boosters. Monthly, football players are looking at $1,420 cash in their pocket without having to buy books or pay tuition and fees. Did you have $1,420 of cash every month in college? If football players were to work a job paying a respectable $10 an hour, they would need to work 36 hours a week for 50 weeks to make $1,420 before taxes to make what they get from their football scholarship and other available money sources.

[ZRod]

I've read it before Landlord and I'm in total agreement about them getting huge benefits, but can you honestly say that it's ok for someone to profit off of a 18-24 year old kids success and not pay him a dime for that work? That would be like your professor taking your final project and submitting it to a company getting payed for it, but you don't see any of the money.

[Landlord]

I've read it before Landlord and I'm in total agreement about them getting huge benefits, but can you honestly say that it's ok for someone to profit off of a 18-24 year old kids success and not pay him a dime for that work? That would be like your professor taking your final project and submitting it to a company getting payed for it, but you don't see any of the money.

 

 

If it's wrong, then the solution is for the person profiting to profit less; not for the amateur athlete to profit more.

 

Adding money is not the way to fix this. Never will be. There's already too much of it and it is ruining the sport.

[ZRod]

I've read it before Landlord and I'm in total agreement about them getting huge benefits, but can you honestly say that it's ok for someone to profit off of a 18-24 year old kids success and not pay him a dime for that work? That would be like your professor taking your final project and submitting it to a company getting payed for it, but you don't see any of the money.

 

 

If it's wrong, then the solution is for the person profiting to profit less; not for the amateur athlete to profit more.

 

Adding money is not the way to fix this. Never will be. There's already too much of it and it is ruining the sport.

That's pretty obvious, the money's been there all along whether people want to admit it or not (Gold Trans Am anyone). So long as these guys had access to the training table 24/7 and medical staff as well, I don't think I would lose too much sleep over them not getting a stipend. The only real concern would be having money for traveling to and from campus, but your a college kid you've got to sacrifice somethings.

[Count 'Bility]

I've read it before Landlord and I'm in total agreement about them getting huge benefits, but can you honestly say that it's ok for someone to profit off of a 18-24 year old kids success and not pay him a dime for that work? That would be like your professor taking your final project and submitting it to a company getting payed for it, but you don't see any of the money.

 

 

If it's wrong, then the solution is for the person profiting to profit less; not for the amateur athlete to profit more.

 

Adding money is not the way to fix this. Never will be. There's already too much of it and it is ruining the sport.

Bingo.

 

I never thought of this this way. No more profiting off the "likenesses". That means no more No. 3, 8, or 80 jerseys in the authentic shop. No more exact rosters and likenesses on the video games only without the names etc etc etc. Dun. Problem solved. There's plenty of other ways to make money other than profiting off college students likenesses.

[Kiyoat Husker]

I've read it before Landlord and I'm in total agreement about them getting huge benefits, but can you honestly say that it's ok for someone to profit off of a 18-24 year old kids success and not pay him a dime for that work? That would be like your professor taking your final project and submitting it to a company getting payed for it, but you don't see any of the money.

 

 

If it's wrong, then the solution is for the person profiting to profit less; not for the amateur athlete to profit more.

 

Adding money is not the way to fix this. Never will be. There's already too much of it and it is ruining the sport.

Bingo.

 

I never thought of this this way. No more profiting off the "likenesses". That means no more No. 3, 8, or 80 jerseys in the authentic shop. No more exact rosters and likenesses on the video games only without the names etc etc etc. Dun. Problem solved. There's plenty of other ways to make money other than profiting off college students likenesses.

 

I think the point ZRod was making wasn't just restricted to profiting off of the likeness of the player. I think he was referring to ALL the money the University and Conference and NCAA make off of the popularity of that athlete's sport (i.e. College Football). You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you have a philosophical problem with the amount of money changing hands now in the amateur sport of college football. fine. I can understand that arguement, but let's then stop wringing our hands with greed when we learn how much more money the B1G network is making than everyone else. The players are major contributors to that cash.