Thoughts on Paying Players?

S

SouthDakotaHusker

Three-Star Recruit
Since it is the off-season, here is a topic I have been pondering

What are everyone's thoughts on paying players to come play football and basketball for college programs?

Between ticket sales, TV contracts, and merchandising, Tommie Frazier or Eric Crouch both brought in over $1 million in revenue to Nebraska; by the latest estimates, Reggie Bush was worth well over $5 million to USC.

Because recruits are bringing in Big $$ to college programs, what about paying recruits a one time payment to come play football or basketball for the college?

To make it fair, (since there are 25 football recruits each year), set a bonus cap at $25 million for football and $25 million for basketball, per college -- the amount doesn't matter, you may lower it if you think this number is too high.

Anyway if Nebraska or Texas or FSU really wants a player, they could offer the player up to $5 or $10 million to come play for the program, that means another player may only be offered $100,000 or so to come play to keep under the $25 million cap.

This signing bonus would be payed out over the four years the athlete plays at the college. If he leaves early or never plays, the athlete loses that part of a signing bonus. For example if a player signs to go to Nebraska for $1 million. If he only plays 2 years before going pro, he only receives $500,000.

If he starts doing drugs, or slacks off in his practices, or gets into trouble with the law, or quits and goes home, and never plays a single down for Nebraska, he receives $0.

If a player is injured and his career is ended prematurely, to be fair, he would receive his entire contract.

What are your thoughts? I believe this would be a beneficial move for three reasons:

1) Each college would be able to get the recruits they want the most.

2) Athletes would be compensated for the money they bring into the progam, rather than going to inflate an athletic director's salary even more.

3) Athletes would have a much better incentive to work hard and not get into trouble off the field, and the competition for playing time would increase, resulting in better athletes and better football.

 
Athlete's would have no reason to go to class.

There would be resentment between players on the team....remember they are still young men.

Which sport gets to hand out money? Just football and basketball...or all sports.

My opinion, it is a horrible idea. If players truly love the sport, then they can play for free for 4 years...then go make the big bucks. It would only serve to drive up ticket prices and merchandise prices.

 
The players from the other teams, for example the volleyball team, would expect to be paid, too. I don't think it's a good idea. For their trouble, these athletes who are recruited or walked on and worked their way up receive scholarships and an education. Ernie Chambers proposed this many years ago. Just my opinion.

 
I say if they plan paying players they should pay the same amount to everyone no matter if their a football player or tennis player and thats how i see it im sure alot would argue but thats my opinon

 
Man, it ain't free...

I'm paying back my college loans, and will be until the end of time! None of those guys have loans!

I consider that getting paid...

 
Since it is the off-season, here is a topic I have been pondering
What are everyone's thoughts on paying players to come play football and basketball for college programs?

Between ticket sales, TV contracts, and merchandising, Tommie Frazier or Eric Crouch both brought in over $1 million in revenue to Nebraska; by the latest estimates, Reggie Bush was worth well over $5 million to USC.

Because recruits are bringing in Big $$ to college programs, what about paying recruits a one time payment to come play football or basketball for the college?

To make it fair, (since there are 25 football recruits each year), set a bonus cap at $25 million for football and $25 million for basketball, per college -- the amount doesn't matter, you may lower it if you think this number is too high.

Anyway if Nebraska or Texas or FSU really wants a player, they could offer the player up to $5 or $10 million to come play for the program, that means another player may only be offered $100,000 or so to come play to keep under the $25 million cap.

This signing bonus would be payed out over the four years the athlete plays at the college. If he leaves early or never plays, the athlete loses that part of a signing bonus. For example if a player signs to go to Nebraska for $1 million. If he only plays 2 years before going pro, he only receives $500,000.

If he starts doing drugs, or slacks off in his practices, or gets into trouble with the law, or quits and goes home, and never plays a single down for Nebraska, he receives $0.

If a player is injured and his career is ended prematurely, to be fair, he would receive his entire contract.

What are your thoughts? I believe this would be a beneficial move for three reasons:

1) Each college would be able to get the recruits they want the most.

2) Athletes would be compensated for the money they bring into the progam, rather than going to inflate an athletic director's salary even more.

3) Athletes would have a much better incentive to work hard and not get into trouble off the field, and the competition for playing time would increase, resulting in better athletes and better football.
Click to expand...
I think they should give them about $2000.00 spending money, they already feed them and pay for books, school and rent - I think that's plenty because they do bring alot of revenue in for the school - Paying players Millions to come to college WTH is wrong with you - Who the f#*k would go to class then? + Who's gonna give the lower revenue schools the 25 million - Are they going to revenue share like the NFL? - NO ultimately it's the schools money to do with how they see fit.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thoughts? Yea, it's a bad idea.

Paying them undermines the reason they are there in the first place. Like someone else said, why go to class when you can earn an absurd amount of money just playing football.

Ok, so you make the pay contingent on going to class or other rules. That's not really fair to the other students.

IMO they are students first, atheletes second. Atleast while they are in college. College football is built around the college, not the football. It's not like they started playing football then decided it would be good to have class near the stadium.

1) Each college would be able to get the recruits they want the most.
Click to expand...
Also, the universities would no longer be chosen on academics, which is why people go to college in the first place.
2) Athletes would be compensated for the money they bring into the progam, rather than going to inflate an athletic director's salary even more.
Click to expand...
Getting a free education doesn't count as compensation? Isn't that the whole point of a scholarship? Here, play football for us and IN EXCHANGE you can go to school for free and then some (stipends, etc).

3) Athletes would have a much better incentive to work hard and not get into trouble off the field, and the competition for playing time would increase, resulting in better athletes and better football.
Click to expand...
The incentive is already there. Mess up, get kicked off the team and possibly out of school.

What you are proposing sounds more like a farm system for the NFL, which IMO universities are not. As long as the teams are associated with the universities (as in, that's why the players are there), players shouldn't be paid.

 
That would be quite possibly the worse thing that could ever happen to collge football.... Players already get a free education, food, and get a monthly stipend for "rent" that far exceeds the rent for anyplace i could live here in lincoln, not to mention free health care, clothes, trips, and prizes at bowl games... they have it pretty good already.

 
I went to college on a partial baseball scholarship to a private school and had to take out student loans along with work study and a part time jobe that ended up being almost full time just to money in my pocket to go to a movie, go out on a date, ect.

I joined the Army shortly after and one of the incentives I got was the Student Loan Repayment Program. And guess what I had to count that as income when I filed taxes at the end of the year.

Because of the restrictions that the NCAA has on athletes working they should be given some sort of stipend for incedental expenses but every one should get the same amount.

 
I'm against the idea. It goes against everything college is about. Attending college is a privilege and as soon as colleges start paying their athletes, players will think the university is lucky to have them, and it should be vis versa. Most high school recruits would overlook academics and tradition when choosing their college, opting to lend their services to the highest bidder. High school recruits should never call the shots. Besides, scholarships are payment enough!

:restore

 
Last edited:
I think a free eduaction, clothing, food, books, and all the answers for the tests should be good enough. If you play, you can basically coast through collegewithout much effort besides on the field.

 
Paying athletes at this level is ridiculous!

Most are not good enough to see the NFL fields so they need to be focused in on the real reason they are where they are and that is getting a degree which lasts a lifetime unlike their 40 time or bench press. Maybe their stipends should be increased but that is a different topic than you are suggesting. Scholarship is payment enough their job is playing a game and the dividend's are having a future in our economy that is brighter than pushing carts at Wal-mart. So lets not feel too sorry for them. I joined the military to get college money if I had the 40 time and mental insanity of these athletes I would have taken that route to pay for college. But we all choose paths for different reasons and to get a 4 year degree for doing something you enjoy I say is a good deal!

 
1) Each college would be able to get the recruits they want the most.
Click to expand...
don't think that would be the case at all, they wouldn't get the players they want the most, another school could shovel more money towards them and sway them away. IMHO, this would lead to swelled ego, selfishness, envy, lack of education, and the list goes on and on. Let them make decisions on where to attend college from their heart, interest, and character, not the size of the paycheck.

 
That would be quite possibly the worse thing that could ever happen to collge football.... Players already get a free education, food, and get a monthly stipend for "rent" that far exceeds the rent for anyplace i could live here in lincoln, not to mention free health care, clothes, trips, and prizes at bowl games... they have it pretty good already.
Click to expand...
:yeah

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top