UCLA players should get paid after Under Armour deal?

[shoot90draw]

According to UCLA QB Josh Rosen they should. After UCLA announced its new deal with Under Armour, worth $280 million over 15 years, Josh Rosen took to twitter to voice his opinion. UCLA QB Josh Rosen: “We’re still amateurs though…Gotta love non-profits #NCAA” The deal is the largest in college sports history, but should the players see some of this money? IMO, NO!!! If you're playing skills are good enough, you will get paid AFTER you're done in school. That's what the NFL is for. Most of these players will receive tons of free merchandise and gear from this deal. Not to mention, a lot are on scholarship. Meaning they are avoiding the 30+ grand in college debt most students get to enjoy. They also have access to world class facilities, personal trainers, nutritionists, dieticians, and tutors. Your average college student does not get free access to all of this. College players should never be paid to play the game. Just my opinion though.

 

[BoosterBosko]

According to UCLA QB Josh Rosen they should. After UCLA announced its new deal with Under Armour, worth $280 million over 15 years, Josh Rosen took to twitter to voice his opinion. UCLA QB Josh Rosen: “We’re still amateurs though…Gotta love non-profits #NCAA” The deal is the largest in college sports history, but should the players see some of this money? IMO, NO!!! If you're playing skills are good enough, you will get paid AFTER you're done in school. That's what the NFL is for. Most of these players will receive tons of free merchandise and gear from this deal. Not to mention, a lot are on scholarship. Meaning they are avoiding the 30+ grand in college debt most students get to enjoy. They also have access to world class facilities, personal trainers, nutritionists, dieticians, and tutors. Your average college student does not get free access to all of this. College players should never be paid to play the game. Just my opinion though.

Youre darn right they shouldn't! There have been plenty of Ampipe boys go on to play ball at college. Not a single one of em wanted to get paid. They knew how big of an opportunity it was to get a free education. One thing Stef had going for him, he knew he wasn't going to the NF?. So why not get a free education out of his abilities. Even if it was with that rat, Coach Nickerson/Fox!

 

[Duck_walk]

According to UCLA QB Josh Rosen they should. After UCLA announced its new deal with Under Armour, worth $280 million over 15 years, Josh Rosen took to twitter to voice his opinion. UCLA QB Josh Rosen: “We’re still amateurs though…Gotta love non-profits #NCAA” The deal is the largest in college sports history, but should the players see some of this money? IMO, NO!!! If you're playing skills are good enough, you will get paid AFTER you're done in school. That's what the NFL is for. Most of these players will receive tons of free merchandise and gear from this deal. Not to mention, a lot are on scholarship. Meaning they are avoiding the 30+ grand in college debt most students get to enjoy. They also have access to world class facilities, personal trainers, nutritionists, dieticians, and tutors. Your average college student does not get free access to all of this. College players should never be paid to play the game. Just my opinion though.

And the ones who never play in the NFL and wind up with CTE nonetheless?

 

[Neutron Monster]

According to UCLA QB Josh Rosen they should. After UCLA announced its new deal with Under Armour, worth $280 million over 15 years, Josh Rosen took to twitter to voice his opinion. UCLA QB Josh Rosen: “We’re still amateurs though…Gotta love non-profits #NCAA” The deal is the largest in college sports history, but should the players see some of this money? IMO, NO!!! If you're playing skills are good enough, you will get paid AFTER you're done in school. That's what the NFL is for. Most of these players will receive tons of free merchandise and gear from this deal. Not to mention, a lot are on scholarship. Meaning they are avoiding the 30+ grand in college debt most students get to enjoy. They also have access to world class facilities, personal trainers, nutritionists, dieticians, and tutors. Your average college student does not get free access to all of this. College players should never be paid to play the game. Just my opinion though.

You have fallen for the con

It's a joke that they don't get paid at the high tier schools, all it does is push money to the administrators and coaches

Amateurism, in 2016, is a sham pushed by the big schools so they don't have to share their bounty with the players. Nothing more or less.

$30k a year is nothing when you are generating as much revenue as the big programs are

If Wash U or UMSL wants to call its players amateurs and subsidize them, that's fair and their choice. At Mizzou, the players are subsidizing everyone else because of the NCAA con

 

[Neutron Monster]

Youre darn right they shouldn't! There have been plenty of Ampipe boys go on to play ball at college. Not a single one of em wanted to get paid. They knew how big of an opportunity it was to get a free education. One thing Stef had going for him, he knew he wasn't going to the NFL. So why not get a free education out of his abilities. Even if it was with that rat, Coach Nickerson/Fox!

There's a difference between a kid going to NWMO to play football and a kid going to an SEC school that is making six figures/year off of them

If they offered to pay your kids, somehow I doubt they'd turn it down

 

[shoot90draw]

You have fallen for the con

It's a joke that they don't get paid at the high tier schools, all it does is push money to the administrators and coaches

Amateurism, in 2016, is a sham pushed by the big schools so they don't have to share their bounty with the players. Nothing more or less.

$30k a year is nothing when you are generating as much revenue as the big programs are

If Wash U or UMSL wants to call its players amateurs and subsidize them, that's fair and their choice. At Mizzou, the players are subsidizing everyone else because of the NCAA con

My $30k was a very low estimation. I only used that because that is how much debt I graduated college with from a larger D-2 school with some scholarships. Someone attending a large school like UCLA, not on an athletic scholarship, is easily looking at 50 grand. That number swells considerably if the student is out of state, which would be covered by an athletic scholarship. Another benefit an athlete gets. By the time you combine the value of a free education, free gear, personal training, tutoring, etc. Youre looking at a number WAY HIGHER than 30 grand.

 

[BoosterBosko]

There's a difference between a kid going to NWMO to play football and a kid going to an SEC school that is making six figures/year off of them

If they offered to pay your kids, somehow I doubt they'd turn it down

I don't think you understand how things in Ampipe work buddy! You play ball for Ampipe, then work the steel mills! Only the lucky few with enough athletic talent get out. They aren't concerned about getting paid to play ball, but better themselves through education. An education that gets them out of Ampipe and the steel mills!

 

[Neutron Monster]

I don't think you understand how things in Ampipe work buddy! You play ball for Ampipe, then work the steel mills! Only the lucky few with enough athletic talent get out. They aren't concerned about getting paid to play ball, but better themselves through education. An education that gets them out of Ampipe and the steel mills!

lol I can't believe I missed the reference at first

 

[sbdude]

The estimated cost of attendance for Mizzou is $25,514/year for in-state and $40,126/year for out-of-state. So a 4 year full ride scholarship is worth approximately $102,056 or $160,504.

For UCLA, the numbers are $34,062/year & $60,744/year for 4 year totals of $136,248 & $242,976.

Those are pretty good chunks of change. What's the value of that education over their lifetime? And, it's not like the players are being forced to play football in college. That is a choice they make, knowing upfront what the deal is. If they don't like that deal, then don't play. It is their choice.

 

[Anders4]

At some point stupid people will complain enough to get college players paid; even though they shouldn't. When in reality they are already getting paid in a way. They're saving hundreds of thousands of dollars as a player. If they want to get paid, how about we pay a kid that goes to MU $25,000 a year and let him pay for all his tuition and cost to attend the university. Hopefully they're not out of state, otherwise they'll need $40K.

Obviously we can't stop there though... How come the football player gets $40K a year (more than some on this board make at their job) and the back up doubles player on the girls tennis team doesn't? Don't give me the "Well they're not risking their body and they don't bring in any money for the school" Title IX says differently, maybe you've heard of that little thing? Lets just open up pandora's box without thinking about the repercussions! (What a great idea!) Sadly most people aren't smart enough to realize this, and yet we wonder why our game is constantly being attacked.

Once DA's have ruined the college game; then everyone will start complaining that HS kids should be getting paid. Idiots like Duck_walk will claim "What about the ones that don't go onto college and get CTE" or "They're the sport bringing in money for the school"

Stupid people, like Duck and Neutron, run the world and will eventually ruin our great sport. You have to draw the line somewhere.

Bring on the hate!

 

[HFox-ScreamingEagles]

At Ampipe, the kids just want to go to college to have a better life. I just wanted to win enough games to get to the next level.

 

[Neutron Monster]

The estimated cost of attendance for Mizzou is $25,514/year for in-state and $40,126/year for out-of-state. So a 4 year full ride scholarship is worth approximately $102,056 or $160,504.

For UCLA, the numbers are $34,062/year & $60,744/year for 4 year totals of $136,248 & $242,976.

Those are pretty good chunks of change. What's the value of that education over their lifetime? And, it's not like the players are being forced to play football in college. That is a choice they make, knowing upfront what the deal is. If they don't like that deal, then don't play. It is their choice.

How would you like it if all the employers in your industry got together and agreed that they would only pay 25k a year? After all, you have a choice to do that job or not.

We've agreed in other industries that this is illegal.

There is no real choice for most of these players. There is no alternative to the NCAA for football, and there is no choice of wage (it is mandated via the NCAA.)

 

[Neutron Monster]

At some point stupid people will complain enough to get college players paid; even though they shouldn't. When in reality they are already getting paid in a way. They're saving hundreds of thousands of dollars as a player. If they want to get paid, how about we pay a kid that goes to MU $25,000 a year and let him pay for all his tuition and cost to attend the university. Hopefully they're not out of state, otherwise they'll need $40K.

Obviously we can't stop there though... How come the football player gets $40K a year (more than some on this board make at their job) and the back up doubles player on the girls tennis team doesn't? Don't give me the "Well they're not risking their body and they don't bring in any money for the school" Title IX says differently, maybe you've heard of that little thing? Lets just open up pandora's box without thinking about the repercussions! (What a great idea!) Sadly most people aren't smart enough to realize this, and yet we wonder why our game is constantly being attacked.

Once DA's have ruined the college game; then everyone will start complaining that HS kids should be getting paid. Idiots like Duck_walk will claim "What about the ones that don't go onto college and get CTE" or "They're the sport bringing in money for the school"

Stupid people, like Duck and Neutron, run the world and will eventually ruin our great sport. You have to draw the line somewhere.

Bring on the hate!

The short answer is, big college sports is a business that makes a lot of money, and the NCAA's goal is to keep the players from getting their money.

That's not true of women's sports, of lower level college athletics, or high school athletics.

And the big programs are already paying guys under the table. All we are asking for is for it to be brought out into the open in a manner that is fair.

25k a year sounds like a good amount of money, but it's all relative. Look at what the coaches are making. Look at the shiny facilities. All that money is being made off the backs of the players.

 

[Mitsurugi san]

The short answer is, big college sports is a business that makes a lot of money, and the NCAA's goal is to keep the players from getting their money.

That's not true of women's sports, of lower level college athletics, or high school athletics.

And the big programs are already paying guys under the table. All we are asking for is for it to be brought out into the open in a manner that is fair.

25k a year sounds like a good amount of money, but it's all relative. Look at what the coaches are making. Look at the shiny facilities. All that money is being made off the backs of the players.

You've neglected to address his point:

If a school or the NCAA only approves the paying of certain athletes (male football players), it will quickly become an issue of discrimination on the grounds of sex (you're absolutely crazy if you think it won't).

Just look at the US women's soccer team who are suing because they don't make as much as the men's soccer team (even though over the period of a four year World Cup cycle the women generated only a fraction of the revenue the men did).

Heck, we already live in an era where the US justice department requires the NCAA to allow individuals who are born male to participate in female sports if they identify as female; the don't even have to have fully transitioned yet (they need only to be one year into hormone therapy). Do you honestly think that same US justice department would stand idley by while male college athletes are getting paid but females were not???

 

[Mitsurugi san]

That's not true of women's sports, of lower level college athletics, or high school athletics.

High School Football? Seriously??

Have you not seen the high school football stadiums in Texas that put Faurot Field to shame? Do you really think a school district would build such multi-million dollar stadiums if the sport wasn't generating the revenue to justify it??

 

[LHSTiger81]

They don't have the money to pay the athletes. They're spending it on high dollar "safe zones"...

 

[Duck_walk]

At some point stupid people will complain enough to get college players paid; even though they shouldn't. When in reality they are already getting paid in a way. They're saving hundreds of thousands of dollars as a player. If they want to get paid, how about we pay a kid that goes to MU $25,000 a year and let him pay for all his tuition and cost to attend the university. Hopefully they're not out of state, otherwise they'll need $40K.

Obviously we can't stop there though... How come the football player gets $40K a year (more than some on this board make at their job) and the back up doubles player on the girls tennis team doesn't? Don't give me the "Well they're not risking their body and they don't bring in any money for the school" Title IX says differently, maybe you've heard of that little thing? Lets just open up pandora's box without thinking about the repercussions! (What a great idea!) Sadly most people aren't smart enough to realize this, and yet we wonder why our game is constantly being attacked.

Once DA's have ruined the college game; then everyone will start complaining that HS kids should be getting paid. Idiots like Duck_walk will claim "What about the ones that don't go onto college and get CTE" or "They're the sport bringing in money for the school"

Stupid people, like Duck and Neutron, run the world and will eventually ruin our great sport. You have to draw the line somewhere.

Bring on the hate!

Regarding CTE, I was simply throwing that out there as a possible area of discussion.
I didn't really take a stand for or against paying athletes. I had no idea that makes me "stupid" or an "idiot". Thanks for alerting me.

 

[BoosterBosko]

At Ampipe, the kids just want to go to college to have a better life. I just wanted to win enough games to get to the next level.

Coach, that has been one of your best posts to date. I actually agree with you on this one.

 

[shoot90draw]

The estimated cost of attendance for Mizzou is $25,514/year for in-state and $40,126/year for out-of-state. So a 4 year full ride scholarship is worth approximately $102,056 or $160,504.

For UCLA, the numbers are $34,062/year & $60,744/year for 4 year totals of $136,248 & $242,976.

Those are pretty good chunks of change. What's the value of that education over their lifetime? And, it's not like the players are being forced to play football in college. That is a choice they make, knowing upfront what the deal is. If they don't like that deal, then don't play. It is their choice.

Couldn't agree more. Im glad someone looked up the actual numbers, I was too lazy to do so. While its hard to asses a dollar amount, but all the other free perks athletes get swells this number even more. I would get on board with paying players if athletes were no longer given full rides, and access to all the other free perks, but instead had to pay for them. Because now that they are being paid, they can afford them right?

 

[Neutron Monster]

Couldn't agree more. Im glad someone looked up the actual numbers, I was too lazy to do so. While its hard to asses a dollar amount, but all the other free perks athletes get swells this number even more. I would get on board with paying players if athletes were no longer given full rides, and access to all the other free perks, but instead had to pay for them. Because now that they are being paid, they can afford them right?

The average player at Mizzou would be way ahead in the scenario you are describing, soo....

 

[Neutron Monster]

High School Football? Seriously??

Have you not seen the high school football stadiums in Texas that put Faurot Field to shame? Do you really think a school district would build such multi-million dollar stadiums if the sport wasn't generating the revenue to justify it??

Seriously? Yes, they would.

How many high school football programs in the state of Missouri are cash flow positive when you account for the costs of the facilities? 0 is a good guess. Why do they build these stadiums and facilities? Because that's how they've chosen to spend their taxpayer dollars because they view athletics as a part of the educational experience.

The point of HS football is fundamentally different from big college football. I find the Texas stuff a little too close to the pros in that regard. I would not want my community to be like that.

The ship has already sailed on big college athletics. It's not about education. It's about money and winning. It's about getting 8 figures a year from the SEC network. It's about getting 5 figures a year per donor for premium seats to football games. It's about keeping kids eligible whether or not they are getting a good education.

Drop the false equivalence

 

[Neutron Monster]

You've neglected to address his point:

If a school or the NCAA only approves the paying of certain athletes (male football players), it will quickly become an issue of discrimination on the grounds of sex (you're absolutely crazy if you think it won't).

Just look at the US women's soccer team who are suing because they don't make as much as the men's soccer team (even though over the period of a four year World Cup cycle the women generated only a fraction of the revenue the men did).

Heck, we already live in an era where the US justice department requires the NCAA to allow individuals who are born male to participate in female sports if they identify as female; the don't even have to have fully transitioned yet (they need only to be one year into hormone therapy). Do you honestly think that same US justice department would stand idley by while male college athletes are getting paid but females were not???

This is stuff you work through, not stuff you use as an excuse to not investigate the issue

The rules were written in a different era and should be revisited. NCAA wasn't getting a billion a year for the basketball tourney from CBS in 1973.

 

[HoopsTournament]

You have fallen for the con

It's a joke that they don't get paid at the high tier schools, all it does is push money to the administrators and coaches

Amateurism, in 2016, is a sham pushed by the big schools so they don't have to share their bounty with the players. Nothing more or less.

$30k a year is nothing when you are generating as much revenue as the big programs are

If Wash U or UMSL wants to call its players amateurs and subsidize them, that's fair and their choice. At Mizzou, the players are subsidizing everyone else because of the NCAA con

If players start to get paid at high tier schools then it will create a level of competitive imbalance that will ruin college football.

 

[Anders4]

Regarding CTE, I was simply throwing that out there as a possible area of discussion.
I didn't really take a stand for or against paying athletes. I had no idea that makes me "stupid" or an "idiot". Thanks for alerting me.

You needed to be reminded... you're welcome.

 

[Anders4]

You've neglected to address his point:

If a school or the NCAA only approves the paying of certain athletes (male football players), it will quickly become an issue of discrimination on the grounds of sex (you're absolutely crazy if you think it won't).

Just look at the US women's soccer team who are suing because they don't make as much as the men's soccer team (even though over the period of a four year World Cup cycle the women generated only a fraction of the revenue the men did).

Heck, we already live in an era where the US justice department requires the NCAA to allow individuals who are born male to participate in female sports if they identify as female; the don't even have to have fully transitioned yet (they need only to be one year into hormone therapy). Do you honestly think that same US justice department would stand idley by while male college athletes are getting paid but females were not???

Here is where the argument will go next....

Football kids are getting paid 40K a year, figure there are at least 80 kids on a team which equates to $3,200,000 for the football team. The girls tennis team gets there 40K a year with roughly 10 girls on the team which is $400,000 for the tennis team.

Then people will complain that the girls tennis team only gets paid $400,000 a year, yet football gets $3,200,000. How can that be fair for one sport to get paid more than another? Title IX here we come! Everything has to be equal! Let's either pay the womens tennis team millions of dollars or pay each football kid 5K a year for everything to be equal, not sure how they'll afford tuition then?

But no! Stupid people don't think about the repercussions. They just pound there chest and scream for change and equality until they get there way.

At least somebody on this board gets it.

 

[wcowherd]

How can that be fair for one sport to get paid more than another?

Keeps schools out of it entirely. I would propose that schools continue to pay what they already do to athletes, but athletes should be free to get any third party endorsements.

The Title IX issue is overblown. Schools already pay different grad students different salaries. They pay men's basketball coaches much more than women's basketball coaches. Once athletes become employees of the school, it'll become the same.

 

[Neutron Monster]

If players start to get paid at high tier schools then it will create a level of competitive imbalance that will ruin college football.

Was this post tongue in cheek? The Power 5, ND, and BYU are already de facto separated from the other schools. Look at the deal they have with the tournament, look at the TV deals, the differences in sponsorships, the facilities, etc.

How many of the top 50 programs, year in and year out, are high dollar college football teams? It's 90% plus.

Part of it is because these programs are already paying kids under the table because they have so much money.

 

[Neutron Monster]

Keeps schools out of it entirely. I would propose that schools continue to pay what they already do to athletes, but athletes should be free to get any third party endorsements.

The Title IX issue is overblown. Schools already pay different grad students different salaries. They pay men's basketball coaches much more than women's basketball coaches. Once athletes become employees of the school, it'll become the same.

If your objection is Title IX, you are complaining arbitrarily about a law that wasn't designed to account for this situation. You don't address that concern by not paying people; you address it by changing the law.

 

[shoot90draw]

Was this post tongue in cheek? The Power 5, ND, and BYU are already de facto separated from the other schools. Look at the deal they have with the tournament, look at the TV deals, the differences in sponsorships, the facilities, etc.

How many of the top 50 programs, year in and year out, are high dollar college football teams? It's 90% plus.

Part of it is because these programs are already paying kids under the table because they have so much money.

How exactly are they paying them under the table? Is it with cold, hard cash? Free cars?

 

[sbdude]

If your objection is Title IX, you are complaining arbitrarily about a law that wasn't designed to account for this situation. You don't address that concern by not paying people; you address it by changing the law.

There is no chance that Title IX will be changed in any way that allows male athletes to receive anything more than female athletes.

And as regards to your reply to my other post, I would just find something different to do if I didn't feel my pay was adequate. I've done it before.

What if you thought of the NCAA as just an apprentice program for the NFL? You get in there, learn your craft and then move on to a higher paying job. Or are apprentice programs a bad thing? Again, the kids don't HAVE to play football. It's a choice. Yeah, I hear it now, some kids don't have any other thing they can do, etc., etc. But, if your skillset is that limited, then so are your choices.

 

[Neutron Monster]

The alternatives to the NFL pay 10 percent or less than what it does. its not like the alternatives to teaching.

Apprentice programs are employment programs subject to labor law including the use of collective bargaining. Thanks for making my point for me!

 

[wcowherd]

There is no chance that Title IX will be changed in any way that allows male athletes to receive anything more than female athletes.

What is your basis for that opinion? Because it is certainly not true.

 

[shoot90draw]

It would be nice if the NCAA was just an apprenticeship program into the NFL, but sadly, there is no way that could happen. That would be an interesting way to fix the issue though....

 

[MoSooner69]

What is your basis for that opinion? Because it is certainly not true.

he actually has a point. Now that they have Title IX, do you actually think they would allow men to get more than women?.. It doesnt matter what kind of money they bring in. That is part of the problem today and why so many male non-revenue sports had to go away.

 

[wcowherd]

he actually has a point. Now that they have Title IX, do you actually think they would allow men to get more than women?.. It doesnt matter what kind of money they bring in. That is part of the problem today and why so many male non-revenue sports had to go away.

It absolutely matters what they bring in, if you're treating them as employees. Again, some male students are paid more than some female students at universities all over the country.

 

[MoSooner69]

It absolutely matters what they bring in, if you're treating them as employees. Again, some male students are paid more than some female students at universities all over the country.

I agree that it should.. but right now according to Title IX it DOES NOT.... number of scholarships have to be equal. That is the big problem and why so many male sports were cut at a lot of schools.

 

[wcowherd]

I agree that it should.. but right now according to Title IX it DOES NOT.... number of scholarships have to be equal. That is the big problem and why so many male sports were cut at a lot of schools.

There's a difference between a scholarship (a benefit) and a salary (compensation). Also, schools must provide the same opportunity for men and women, which means scholarships.

 

[MoSooner69]

not doubt.. but you really dont think that if the university paid a football player $12,000 and only paid the star women's basketball player $5,000 there would not be a women's group ready to go to court? Right now scholarships is all they have... they will want salaries to be done the same way...

 

[wcowherd]

not doubt.. but you really dont think that if the university paid a football player $12,000 and only paid the star women's basketball player $5,000 there would not be a women's group ready to go to court? Right now scholarships is all they have... they will want salaries to be done the same way...

Sure, I'll bet someone would challenge it in court. They'd lose, and we'd move on.

 

[MoSooner69]

not sure they would lose... they should but then again Title IX as it is currently being used in college should not be....