NCAA Atheltics - Pay for Play - Athletic Pension (1 Viewer)

[On The Rocks]

I was listening to an interview with Bruce Pearl (with Clay Travis) this morning on the way to work.  I don't know a lot about Pearl, other than what I've read today after listening to the interview.  I know he's had, or been accused of violations at Tennessee and currently under the microscope at Auburn with the FBI with the recent Chuck Person investigation.

Having said that I don't know if some on here would disqualify him from being a quality source for ideas or if it doesn't matter what he says. You might think he's a snake, and always will be, but personally, I thought he had an interesting idea.

The idea of "NCAA Athletic Pension".  It's an idea that may have been bouncing around for years, but one I had not heard before. 

Paid out to NCAA Athletes at some point in their lives, Maybe not something that goes to guys that go on to make millions of dollars at the professional level, maybe something that gets paid out based on need.  I don't know.  I thought it was a cool idea.  I don't suppose it will do anything to diminish recruiting violations, but it would help the NCAA Athlete that does not make it in the next level, or blows out their knee, or is unable to complete their education for whatever reason.

Of course the NCAA would probably need to be the overseer of the pension fund, which would get scary.

Is this a new idea?  Or has it been around for a while?

 

[Juxtatarot]

There are currently more than 460,000 NCAA student-athletes.  The numbers would be so massive I don't really understand how this could work.

 

[On The Rocks]

There are currently more than 460,000 NCAA student-athletes.  The numbers would be so massive I don't really understand how this could work.

Clearly it would need work. 

A few guidelines just to start:

 Only provided to student athletes that participate 2 to 4 years of athletics.

 Only provided to student athletes that graduate from institute they participated in athletics.

 

[ChiefD]

No.

These kids are getting the opportunity of a lifetime. They are getting a free education at some of the best universities in the world. They have the world at their fingertips and will come out of college relatively debt free (I understand not every sport gets full scholarships for all team members) and connections that can help them succeed in life.

And for those who say "these kids are getting exploited for money" - too bad. Those dollars feed so many other programs at these schools to provide even more opportunity.

Hell, I would be more for these universities loosening their endowment purse strings and taking the financial burden off the other students than give MORE to the student athletes who are already getting a free ride.

 

[Hov34]

They are getting paid.  They are getting a full ride and and opportunity at a college education.  If that's not good enough?  Get a job and S.T.F.U.

As someone who has a Freshman at UT (Straight A's in High School one of the top 20 in the nation, top 10 in her class - and a 33 on her ACT) and still didn't get a full ride) I don't have much sympathy for "Student Athletes" #####ing about money.  #### off.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I don't know why people keep talking about paying college athletes......as long as the word "student" is still attached to "student athlete" and they are taking classes supposedly going to class and receiving being given grades.....the NCAA will never actually pay the athlete....

Title IX would also have a field day with making sure EVERY athlete, male or female, in every sport at the school is being paid the exact same amount.....

and let's be honest the problem isn't really throwing these guys/gals $75 bucks a week to go to a few dinners and a movie....its the kids getting cars and family houses and thousands of dollars under the table that is the issue.....even if you pay the athletes, that is still going to happen..

 

[Pipes]

No.

These kids are getting the opportunity of a lifetime. They are getting a free education at some of the best universities in the world. They have the world at their fingertips and will come out of college relatively debt free (I understand not every sport gets full scholarships for all team members) and connections that can help them succeed in life.

And for those who say "these kids are getting exploited for money" - too bad. Those dollars feed so many other programs at these schools to provide even more opportunity.

Hell, I would be more for these universities loosening their endowment purse strings and taking the financial burden off the other students than give MORE to the student athletes who are already getting a free ride.

Only a small percentage are getting exploited at that. That's what irritates me about Bilas and all the honks going off about kids getting paid.  Each major college has a couple of kids (some more) where sure the school is making a boatload off of through jersey sales and what not but more of these athletes are unrecognizable, unmarketable and getting a great deal with a full scholarship.  So what's the solution?  Give all these athletes a stipend?  The schools will still be exploiting the upper echelon athletes.  Pay the kids their true market value?  There is no easy solution to this.

 

[D-Day]

The colleges could actually help the players to earn money.  Let the players sign endorsement deals, get paid for autograph sessions, sell their memorabilia.  Give everyone the same opportunity to earn their money.  Jerry Jones found new ways to earn money when he bought the Cowboys.  The pinheads at the NCAA and college presidents just need to open their minds and not their pocket books.  The push back will come from faculty complaining about not making as much money as the star QB.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

The colleges could actually help the players to earn money.  Let the players sign endorsement deals, get paid for autograph sessions, sell their memorabilia.  Give everyone the same opportunity to earn their money.  Jerry Jones found new ways to earn money when he bought the Cowboys.  The pinheads at the NCAA and college presidents just need to open their minds and not their pocket books.  The push back will come from faculty complaining about not making as much money as the star QB.

once again you must factor in Title IX.... which shreds this idea......do you think the long snapper is going to get an endorsement deal, get money for his autograph, sell any of his memorabilia......yeah me either....and the 5th best player on the girls lacrosse team....or the worst player on the girls soccer team...

and even if you do something like this....it still doesn't prevent Joe Booster from buying Reggie Bush and his family cars and houses....all the bad stuff will still happen...

 

[Bull Dozier]

once again you must factor in Title IX.... which shreds this idea......do you think the long snapper is going to get an endorsement deal, get money for his autograph, sell any of his memorabilia......yeah me either....and the 5th best player on the girls lacrosse team....or the worst player on the girls soccer team...

and even if you do something like this....it still doesn't prevent Joe Booster from buying Reggie Bush and his family cars and houses....all the bad stuff will still happen...

Title IX still probably prevents it, but some kind of system where the player gets x% of the endorsement money, and the rest going into some sort of pool equally shared by all NCAA athletes, or whatever, might get around some of the dirty stuff.  Why would a booster risk anything, if instead of buying a house, he can just legally write a check?  Player wins, all athletes win, booster wins.

 

[Pipes]

Title IX still probably prevents it, but some kind of system where the player gets x% of the endorsement money, and the rest going into some sort of pool equally shared by all NCAA athletes, or whatever, might get around some of the dirty stuff.  Why would a booster risk anything, if instead of buying a house, he can just legally write a check?  Player wins, all athletes win, booster wins.

Schools with the biggest budget and wealthiest boosters win.  So essentially it becomes a legally bidding war for the 5 star athletes?  Sadly probably not a lot different from what's happening today except for the legal part.

 

[D-Day]

once again you must factor in Title IX.... which shreds this idea......do you think the long snapper is going to get an endorsement deal, get money for his autograph, sell any of his memorabilia......yeah me either....and the 5th best player on the girls lacrosse team....or the worst player on the girls soccer team...

and even if you do something like this....it still doesn't prevent Joe Booster from buying Reggie Bush and his family cars and houses....all the bad stuff will still happen...

Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.  It is up to the sport and players to be marketable.  I'm sure the star on the UConn Woman's basketball team may make more than the UConn QB.  And really, who cares about Reggie getting paid by the boosters?  I'm in it for the entertainment, not the "pride" that someone got a good education, and oh, by the way, they fill up their free time playing football.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Title IX still probably prevents it, but some kind of system where the player gets x% of the endorsement money, and the rest going into some sort of pool equally shared by all NCAA athletes, or whatever, might get around some of the dirty stuff.  Why would a booster risk anything, if instead of buying a house, he can just legally write a check?  Player wins, all athletes win, booster wins.

these are amateur STUDENT athletes....as soon as you pay them anything they become part of the pay roll/employees/professionals....

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.  It is up to the sport and players to be marketable.  I'm sure the star on the UConn Woman's basketball team may make more than the UConn QB.  And really, who cares about Reggie getting paid by the boosters?  I'm in it for the entertainment, not the "pride" that someone got a good education, and oh, by the way, they fill up their free time playing football.

you really think its a good idea to just throw Billy Long Snapper to the wolves in the world of business against Johnny Football and make him fend for himself based on jersey sales and autographs....?

 

[D-Day]

you really think its a good idea to just throw Billy Long Snapper to the wolves in the world of business against Johnny Football and make him fend for himself based on jersey sales and autographs....?

I don't think we are going to iron out all of the wrinkles here for a billion dollar industry.  The point is, the colleges don't want to give up money to pay the players.  There are other easy opportunities to generate money for the players that cost the colleges virtually $0. 

The problem will be the college presidents wanting to get THEIR hands on this new stream of income.  Think about the evolution of the football programs for colleges.  

1.  Hey, lets start a football team, build a stadium and charge people money to come see them play.  We just can't afford to pay the players

2.  Lets contract with the local TV broadcaster to show a few games a year, and we get more money.  We just can't afford to pay the players

3.  I've got an idea! Lets sell a couple of our "big" games to the national broadcasters to get more money, but we just can't afford to pay the players.

4.  Hey, we can make some more money by licensing our logo.  Even though we are getting even more money, we cant afford to pay the players

5.  Let's start our own network for the conference!  We will make a TON more money, but we still won't be able to pay the players

6.  PLAYOFFS!,  We'll make a kill'n, but we still won't be able to pay the players.

7.  Now we just need to build bigger, better stadiums with luxury boxes, NAMING RIGHTS, and exclusive sponsorships so that we can make even more money.  Gosh darn it, I just wish we made enough money to pay the players.

The money is out there.  It's just who gets it.

 

[strykerpks]

The 'full ride' basketball and football players who do nothing but play and practice should get vouchers for education after their eligibility is up. Some kid gets a full ride to Duke to play basketball, let him focus on that. If he's on the team 3 years before leaving, give him 3 years free education to be claimed later. After his NBA career, Italian league, whatever. 

I'm curious about this. Calipari was on the DP show this morning and he said that his players have scholarships for life after they leave for the pros. Is that something that's already in place across the board?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

I don't think we are going to iron out all of the wrinkles here for a billion dollar industry.  The point is, the colleges don't want to give up money to pay the players.  There are other easy opportunities to generate money for the players that cost the colleges virtually $0. 

The problem will be the college presidents wanting to get THEIR hands on this new stream of income.  Think about the evolution of the football programs for colleges.  

1.  Hey, lets start a football team, build a stadium and charge people money to come see them play.  We just can't afford to pay the players

2.  Lets contract with the local TV broadcaster to show a few games a year, and we get more money.  We just can't afford to pay the players

3.  I've got an idea! Lets sell a couple of our "big" games to the national broadcasters to get more money, but we just can't afford to pay the players.

4.  Hey, we can make some more money by licensing our logo.  Even though we are getting even more money, we cant afford to pay the players

5.  Let's start our own network for the conference!  We will make a TON more money, but we still won't be able to pay the players

6.  PLAYOFFS!,  We'll make a kill'n, but we still won't be able to pay the players.

7.  Now we just need to build bigger, better stadiums with luxury boxes, NAMING RIGHTS, and exclusive sponsorships so that we can make even more money.  Gosh darn it, I just wish we made enough money to pay the players.

The money is out there.  It's just who gets it.

all the stuff above is just noise...the business side of college athletics.....

universities never have and never will write a player a check for playing sports....

 

[Stinkin Ref]

when my kids were in high school...they use to charge people $5 to get in the game.....should my kid get a cut of that...?

 

[D-Day]

when my kids were in high school...they use to charge people $5 to get in the game.....should my kid get a cut of that...?

The point being, the colleges keep finding new streams of revenue, and they continue to cry poor, and that they can't afford to pay the players.  The colleges can remove some self inflicted restrictions on players earning money for their likeness/endorsement without a financial burden.  Again, the only problem is the college keeping their hands out of the player's pockets.  

It is about money and power, and who controls them.

 

[Bull Dozier]

Schools with the biggest budget and wealthiest boosters win.  So essentially it becomes a legally bidding war for the 5 star athletes?  Sadly probably not a lot different from what's happening today except for the legal part.

Exactly.  This is how it currently works (particularly that the biggest budget teams win), but it is the wild wild west and everyone complains.  Legalize it, put some controls in it, and I would imagine it would become a cleaner system (in theory)..

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Exactly.  This is how it currently works (particularly that the biggest budget teams win), but it is the wild wild west and everyone complains.  Legalize it, put some controls in it, and I would imagine it would become a cleaner system (in theory)..

even if you agree to pay them something....think you can control it...etc....the Reggie Bush things are STILL going to happen....and again Title IX is going to make it that Suzy Soccer Second String is going to get as much as Johnny Football....ain't gonna happen...

 

[Mr.Pack]

These kids are getting the opportunity of a lifetime. They are getting a free education at some of the best universities in the world.

This is where I'm at. the only thing that i would be on board for is giving the kids who's name is on Jerseys etc and the colleges make the money off their likeness. Other than that, I agree with you. The people saying they aren't getting paid are ignorant. $50k/yr for an education isn't getting paid?

 

[MAC_32]

The first step is easy, get rid of the one-and-done. Adopt baseball rules, declare out of high school or you're not eligible for 3 years. 

The next steps are much, much messier. I don't think you'll ever be able to do full reform, but neuter the ncaa and have an independent third party make the seedy underbelly of recruiting a priority? Worth a shot. But stop punishing the schools. By the time sanctions are passed down all of the violators have been replaced and players moved on. Have to target the big fish. 

 

[Thorpe]

The top 25 schools are making all the profits in college sports.  

My local school recently cut 4 sports and the students have to pay around $200/year to subsidize the football team, and money still has to come of the general fund to balance the books.  I would rather see some kind of profit sharing among all the schools than paying players.  

If schools are allowed to pay players, then the scholarship limit becomes moot, and you will have a school like Bama stockpiling talented players they don't need just so they aren't playing for other schools.

If you let the players profit off their signatures/likeness, then boosters will pony up the money to buy from every player on the team.

 

[RUSF18]

The top 25 schools are making all the profits in college sports.  

My local school recently cut 4 sports and the students have to pay around $200/year to subsidize the football team, and money still has to come of the general fund to balance the books.  I would rather see some kind of profit sharing among all the schools than paying players.  

If schools are allowed to pay players, then the scholarship limit becomes moot, and you will have a school like Bama stockpiling talented players they don't need just so they aren't playing for other schools.

If you let the players profit off their signatures/likeness, then boosters will pony up the money to buy from every player on the team.

Which school? At most D1 schools, the football/basketball teams subsidize the rest of the sports which don't make money. 

 

[MAC_32]

Which school? At most D1 schools, the football/basketball teams subsidize the rest of the sports which don't make money. 

Power conference schools, not most D1 schools. 

 

[Thorpe]

Which school? At most D1 schools, the football/basketball teams subsidize the rest of the sports which don't make money. 

University at Buffalo

Football and Basketball bring in almost all of the revenue, but they spend more than they bring in.  

All the sports at UB bring in about 6 million a year (ticket sales, tv contract, radio contract, advertising) , and the student fees and general fund and donations bring in 28 million.

The football teams costs 7.5 million.

 

[RUSF18]

University at Buffalo

Football and Basketball bring in almost all of the revenue, but they spend more than they bring in.  

All the sports at UB bring in about 6 million a year (ticket sales, tv contract, radio contract, advertising) , and the student fees and general fund and donations bring in 28 million.

The football teams costs 7.5 million.

If the football team "only" costs $7.5MM, let's just assume basketball costs another $2.5MM for a $10MM total. So those programs combine to operate at maybe a $5MM loss (you said they bring in almost all the revenue, so I'll give the other sports $1MM). They're still spending $23MM to fund all those other sports each year. That seems like a way bigger problem than football and basketball and a case for why many non-revenue sports would be better served being club level. 

 

[brettdj]

Even Power Conference schools have problems.

University of Maryland was getting ready to cut approx.  18 sports before they moved to the Big Ten. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

A question while i decide how to weigh in - how much would the 2 big NCAA sports suffer from losing their pro-worthy athletes entirely? Isn't it all more about school ties & rivalries & dynastic programs than talent?

 

[RUSF18]

Even Power Conference schools have problems.

University of Maryland was getting ready to cut approx.  18 sports before they moved to the Big Ten. 

Reading it again, I didn't mean to imply that most schools' football and basketball programs fully subsidize the non-revenue programs. But most are profitable and therefore reduce the need, even slightly, for subsidies/student fees to cover the costs associated with all those other programs. 

The Rutgers athletic department will continue to have an enormous subsidy until the school starts receiving it's full share of the B1G TV deal, and then things become neutral or profitable overall. But football and basketball are currently profitable and it's the other 20 programs that run at an extreme deficit for obvious reasons. 

 

[Uruk-Hai]

A question while i decide how to weigh in - how much would the 2 big NCAA sports suffer from losing their pro-worthy athletes entirely? Isn't it all more about school ties & rivalries & dynastic programs than talent?

I believe that college sports are so popular mainly because of school ties and rivalries. However, there's also a tipping point. If the quality of play was terrible because elite athletes are no longer attending, that would certainly turn some people off (though some are already turned off by quality of play). I also believe that some players grow into being pro-worthy while in college (see: a bazillion examples) and most eventual pros don't come fully-formed out of HS (I'm talking hoops and football here, especially football). 

 

[dschuler]

The only sports in college that make a profit are college football and some college basketball schools.  If everyone is getting paid after expenses the amount would have to be so minuscule after having accountants and everyone else sorting it out.  I would be surprised if it was more than one dollar a month.  Like someone said earlier, there are over 460,000 current athletes, and tens of millions more of them alive.  That means if the pension paid $1Billion out per year and there are 20 million college athletes alive that’s $50 per year, or $4 per month.  It seems like a good idea in theory until you put numbers on a balance sheet.  People can say these schools make so much money but with title IX a lot that money is going into programs that lose several million. 

I think a better idea would be a basic college income for programs that make money, maybe a couple thousand per month for spending money.  A pension goes against what is shifting culturally in our society.  Fewer and fewer Fortune 500 companies offer pensions, and the military just cut their pension as well.  It’s extremelt expensive, as it’s a payment that doesn’t stop until the person dies. 

 

[RUSF18]

I'm fully on board with just letting everyone profit from their likeness, from the star QB (millions?) to the random men's volleyball player (go get your free beer!). 

Beyond that, I agree that schools should be on the hook for medical coverage post-graduation for all scholarship athletes. If they're not willing to cover the costs of a lacrosse player dealing with post-concussion symptoms for years, they can shut down the sport. 

 

[Moe.]

The starting point should be allowing players to profit from their likeness. I don't think anyone wants the schools to pay players directly for a number of reasons, many of them already covered in this thread and in the NCAA basketball thread a couple of weeks ago.

I wouldn't trust the NCAA to do much of anything at this point, much less administer some huge pension program. It would be a nightmare. Allow them to get money elsewhere and a lot of the concerns go away.

 

[Thorpe]

If the football team "only" costs $7.5MM, let's just assume basketball costs another $2.5MM for a $10MM total. So those programs combine to operate at maybe a $5MM loss (you said they bring in almost all the revenue, so I'll give the other sports $1MM). They're still spending $23MM to fund all those other sports each year. That seems like a way bigger problem than football and basketball and a case for why many non-revenue sports would be better served being club level. 

The NCAA forces schools to have a minimum of 16 teams to be Div 1 in football, and Title IX forces them to give the same number of women scholarships as men. 

UB recently cut Mens Soccer, Womens Rowing, Mens Swimming and Baseball, and that saved them $2MM.  

Also, a lot of the $23MM goes to shared expenses - the AD's salary, trainers, facilities, compliance officers, tutor, marketing, fund raising, etc.  The other 14 sports probably cost something like $10MM.