NCAA pushes $2K increase for athletes

[PJHawk]

Not only will this give the Big Ten an advantage over the have-nots of the world it is the right thing to do.

WASHINGTON -- NCAA president Mark Emmert said Monday he supports a proposal to allow conferences to increase grants to student athletes by $2,000 "to more closely approach" the full cost of attending college, beyond the athletic scholarships athletes receive for tuition, fees, room, board and books.

Emmert told the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics that the proposal will be finalized this week and he'll ask the NCAA Division I Board of Directors to support it. He noted that student athletes have limited opportunities to work outside the classroom and playing fields, and that the current model of athletic scholarship hasn't changed for 40 years.
Emmert said he'll also ask the board to allow colleges and universities to provide multiyear grants, instead of year-to-year scholarships. "This week, I'll be asking the board to support a proposal to allow conferences -- not mandate anyone, but allow conferences, not individual institutions -- to increase the value of an athletic grant in aid to more closely approach the full cost of attendance," Emmert said.

"We are going to create a model that would allow -- probably ... up to $2,000 in addition to" tuition, fees, room and board, books and supplies.


NCAA weighing $2,000 payments to student athletes - ESPN

 

[9YRPLAN]

this could be killer for the lesser-endowed programs

 

[TritonHawkeye]

Could also push some universities to drop less profitable sports programs.

 

[hawkfarmer]

Why is it the right thing to do? They are getting a free education and free room and board. That's worth a lot, not too mention the opportunities the degree will provide after graduation. I don't care if they make the university millions. This is not a commission based program. This is college athletics. If you do this, why not just drop the whole thing and have a bidding war for athletes. That's all it really. This is a dumb idea.

 

[PJHawk]

I don't care if they make the university millions. This is not a commission based program. This is college athletics. If you do this, why not just drop the whole thing and have a bidding war for athletes. That's all it really. This is a dumb idea.

So says the guy who never had the makings of a varsity athlete. The Big Ten rakes in millions of dollars in revenue from its football TV contract. The league distributed more than $20 million to each school last year (in part by the Big Ten Network) players should get some of that windfall - and yes just to prevent lawsuits all athletes, non-revenue included should and will share in the money.

 

[thejumper5]

Hopefully they'll combine this with a smaller scholarship limit for football (a likely reduction from 85 to 80) so that school can spend more money per athlete and still be in the black. It will be good for the athletes and good for parity.

 

[SECisCRAP]

If you add up how much these kids are getting from a full ride plus room and board its rediculous. An extra 2k is dumb. Most non sport playing kids take loans to go to college, and most athletes get to go free. This is the beginning of legalizing the buying of talent.

 

[hawkfarmer]

So says the guy who never had the makings of a varsity athlete. The Big Ten rakes in millions of dollars in revenue from its football TV contract. The league distributed more than $20 million to each school last year (in part by the Big Ten Network) players should get some of that windfall - and yes just to prevent lawsuits all athletes, non-revenue included should and will share in the money.

You are right I wasn't a division 1 athlete, but I also had to pay for my own education, so these guys ******* and complaining that they don't get paid when they make the university X dollars is dumb. They get paid in an education, free food, free housing etc, great degree.

Why do they need the extra 2k. Booze, tattoos, shoes and clothes (they get a lot of that from the university anyways).

Now it's 2k, then it's 5k, then it's well if you are a bigger school it's 10k and so on. How do you stop it. The NCAA hasn't been amature in reality for a long time.

I'd say make it so kids can go straight to the NFL straight out of high school if they want more than a free education. Let's see how that works.

 

[ICHawk24]

Most schools are already in the red.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

I would like to see a system where underperforming athletes are forced to pay the school back for their scholarship. You bring in a big time recruit and he turns out to suck, well you get your money back. They aren't putting these kids on scholarship so they can learn, they are bringing them in to win football games damn it. Not only will this save schools money, but it's the RIGHT thing to do.

 

[SECisCRAP]

It should be left at free degree period.

 

[hawkfarmer]

I would like to see a system where underperforming athletes are forced to pay the school back for their scholarship. You bring in a big time recruit and he turns out to suck, well you get your money back. They aren't putting these kids on scholarship so they can learn, they are bringing them in to win football games damn it. Not only will this save schools money, but it's the RIGHT thing to do.

Man I hope you are joking, but I don't see any smiley/winky faces

 

[DwayneTwill]

You are right I wasn't a division 1 athlete, but I also had to pay for my own education, so these guys ******* and complaining that they don't get paid when they make the university X dollars is dumb. They get paid in an education, free food, free housing etc, great degree.

Why do they need the extra 2k. Booze, tattoos, shoes and clothes (they get a lot of that from the university anyways).

Now it's 2k, then it's 5k, then it's well if you are a bigger school it's 10k and so on. How do you stop it. The NCAA hasn't been amature in reality for a long time.

I'd say make it so kids can go straight to the NFL straight out of high school if they want more than a free education. Let's see how that works.

Agreed.

 

[PJHawk]

Why do they need the extra 2k. Booze, tattoos, shoes and clothes (they get a lot of that from the university anyways).

Please provide a list of University's (outside the SEC anyway) providing booze and tattoos to scholarship athletes. Aside from that up until the implementation of Title IX around 1970 or so football players were paid a stipend, all this latest move by the NCAA does is restore what was taken away. As Jim Delany so eloquently put it: "Forty years ago, you had a scholarship plus $15 a month laundry money," Delany said. "Today, you have the same scholarship, but not with the $15 laundry money.

 

[hawkfarmer]

Please provide a list of University's (outside the SEC anyway) providing booze and tattoos to scholarship athletes. Aside from that up until the implementation of Title IX around 1970 or so football players were paid a stipend, all this latest move by the NCAA does is restore what was taken away. As Jim Delany so eloquently put it: "Forty years ago, you had a scholarship plus $15 a month laundry money," Delany said. "Today, you have the same scholarship, but not with the $15 laundry money.

I meant they would spend money on booze, tattoos, and shoes/clothes, but they are given plenty of shoes and clothes. I'm saying they're given what they need. The rest is not necessary. I hope that is now cleared up.

 

[BALDIES7980]

I meant they would spend money on booze, tattoos, and shoes/clothes, but they are given plenty of shoes and clothes. I'm saying they're given what they need. The rest is not necessary. I hope that is now cleared up.

Can't agree. Participation in athletics representing a University severely limits the ability of the athlete to earn the extra money needed to live a normal life. Just like anyone else with money in their hand they CAN choose to use it unwisely but they would be given every opportunity to be normal.
Now I still think that am athlete should be subject to performance expectations because it is essentially their "job" while in school. However not living up to their potential is extreme. When athletes get into trouble they should be held accountable just as if they were in the normal working environment. You test positive on a drug test bam your gone! If they fail a class that class cannot be repaid for by scholarship money, its on them.
If they have below standard grade issues two consecutive periods they are off scholarship for the same amount of time and not eligible to play or practice.

 

[PJHawk]

I meant they would spend money on booze, tattoos, and shoes/clothes, but they are given plenty of shoes and clothes. I'm saying they're given what they need. The rest is not necessary. I hope that is now cleared up.

What is still not clear is how you are a fan of Iowa football or the college game in general when you have such an abysmal opinion of the players that they are all about a life of "booze, tattoos, and shoes" - WTF? You do know that most college football players are not thugs? As far as this stipend have you considered that for a program like Iowa with a high number of out of state players and the ever rising cost of transportation that the extra 2k a year could go a long ways to offset those costs?

I don’t’ know whether you are still traumatized from your youth of never being good enough at athletics or maybe stuffed in a locker too many times but consider this an intervention.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

What is still not clear is how you are a fan of Iowa football or the college game in general when you have such an abysmal opinion of the players that they are all about a life of "booze, tattoos, and shoes" - WTF? You do know that most college football players are not thugs? As far as this stipend have you considered that for a program like Iowa with a high number of out of state players and the ever rising cost of transportation that the extra 2k a year could go a long ways to offset those costs?

I don’t’ know whether you are still traumatized from your youth of never being good enough at athletics or maybe stuffed in a locker too many times but consider this an intervention.

Internet arguing 101: when you run out of valid points, resort to personal attacks.

 

[CalifornIowA]

While I understand the concern for paying athletes, I think people against it don't take everything into consideration. While I was at Iowa, I never brought one dime into the university, I didn't produce a product that brings 70,000 plus to come see me either. To argue "the kids get a free education already" is ignoring a huge part of the equation. Those who argue they had to pay to go to Iowa, don't include how much money they brought to Iowa. To dumb it down, if Iowa has a choice to only accept your money as a student, or to accept a great football player, Iowa will probably take the player. Why, because all the money you are willing to pay in school tution and books, don't even come close to how much that player can bring them. To me, it's simply understanding the players value. How many jerseys has the university sold, only because it says #7? How much revenue is brought in because of the players on Saturday? How much from BTN? DVDs, posters, shirts etc? Add that up, then compare how much McNutt receives, and you might reconsider. Those players have earned their free education, it's not a "free" ride, they're plate is full. And Iowa will tell you, they are worth every penny spent!

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

While I understand the concern for paying athletes, I think people against it don't take everything into consideration. While I was at Iowa, I never brought one dime into the university, I didn't produce a product that brings 70,000 plus to come see me either. To argue "the kids get a free education already" is ignoring a huge part of the equation. Those who argue they had to pay to go to Iowa, don't include how much money they brought to Iowa. To dumb it down, if Iowa has a choice to only accept your money as a student, or to accept a great football player, Iowa will probably take the player. Why, because all the money you are willing to pay in school tution and books, don't even come close to how much that player can bring them. To me, it's simply understanding the players value. How many jerseys has the university sold, only because it says #7? How much revenue is brought in because of the players on Saturday? How much from BTN? DVDs, posters, shirts etc? Add that up, then compare how much McNutt receives, and you might reconsider. Those players have earned their free education, it's not a "free" ride, they're plate is full. And Iowa will tell you, they are worth every penny spent!

The thing is 95% of the players on the Iowa team don't either. You could replace almost any one of them with average high school player X and still bring in the same amount of money. Why should McNutt only get paid as much as the 4th string TE when he's seeing people every where wear his jersey while the 4th string TE hasn't brought in a dime to the university?