Snap judgment: People need to realize that players do get paid
October 27, 2011 | by Collin Carroll, regular columnist
College football players have been walking with a spring in their step since Monday, when NCAA president Mark Emmert supported a proposal that would increase student-athlete grants by as much as $2,000 annually.
An advocacy group known as the National College Players Association gathered a petition of 339 athletes in support of a plan which would more accurately reimburse players for the full price tag of attending college.
So here’s my question: In a world that begs for a cure to the plague of boosters and agents, will this proposal be the messiah?
Let me answer by saying Nevin Shapiro won’t be the last spray-tanned tycoon with a hair gel addiction to host a yacht party for college football players.
The proposal wasn’t intended to cure the problem of illegal benefits, though it would be comical if that were the case. Bless Emmert’s heart for attempting to compensate the talent for bringing millions of dollars to schools, TV networks and the NCAA. If athletes choose to turn down tens of thousands of dollars in booster money, it won’t be because they’ve been greased with a couple extra G’s from their university.
I’m a little weary of this new plan. Giving players some extra cash is a nice thought, but it could compound the sense of entitlement so rampant in college football, which could ultimately lead to the acceptance of illegal benefits that will actually make a difference in their lives. If you give a mouse a cookie...
With regards to a solution to the booster and agent problem, I subscribe to Sandra Bullock’s doctrine in “Miss Congeniality.” An undercover FBI agent, Bullock is competing in a beauty pageant interview when host William Shatner asks, “What is the one most important thing our society needs?” While every other contestant drones, “world peace,” Bullock prescribes, “harsher punishment for parole violators.”
The NCAA officials have done a great job of cracking down on universities and players for the illegal flow of benefits — reducing scholarships, vacating wins, post-season bans, etc. Still, I wouldn’t mind seeing them administer the “death penalty” in extreme cases — schools need to understand the weight of this issue.
I can’t stand when people say, “You know what? This is ridiculous. Schools should just pay college football players.”
Would schools offer contracts worth tens of thousands of dollars to a kid who’s never played a down of college football? Recruiting would become a nightmare. Would every kid get the same contract? If not, players would whine, become jealous, and the game would completely lose its innocence.
Title IX activists would have a cow. Enough said.
College football is supposed to represent the reason we first started playing the game — because we love it. America is only big enough for one professional football league filled with egotistical dollar-chasers.
Most importantly, if schools start paying players, we’re letting the crooks win. Shapiro, Terrelle Pryor, Reggie Bush and even Sherwood Blount (the booster behind Southern Methodist University scandal in the ‘80s) get precisely what they wanted all along — amateur athletes living prodigal lifestyles.
What about families who can’t afford necessities not covered by current scholarships, such as car insurance, gas money and a cell phone bill? Students who hail from difficult financial situations qualify for a Pell Grant, valued up to $2,775 per semester, which covers any additional living expenses.
Why do college athletes accept illegal benefits? Is it to provide for their families? I’d like to think so, but the problem runs much deeper than players’ pockets. It’s a lack of respect for the integrity of college football.
Giving players more money won’t solve the insubordination. We already have more money than we know what to do with.
Scholarship football players received a check for $4,143 at the beginning of the season to cover room and board for the semester. Add to that a training camp check for $150, a Thanksgiving check for $150, a $400 meal enhancement check, $600 at the bowl game, and $15 in spending money after every home game. You’re looking at $5,533 in cash during the fall semester — not including the possibility of qualifying for a $2,775 Pell Grant.
Football players need to eat, and universities are well aware. We are provided three meals and a snack per day during our almost three-week training camp, totaling $585 per player. Training table,
eaten after three practices per week, is valued at $531 per player for the semester. Between catered meals and snacks on road trips, each player receives about $482 in food during the season.
NCAA bylaw 16.5.2.h states, “An institution may provide fruit, nuts and bagels to a student-athlete at any time.” Therefore, we are each given roughly $285 in such snacks. After each weight-lifting session, we receive two protein shakes, which yield a season total of $400.
During our week of training at our bowl destination, we eat an additional three meals and a snack per day, on the house — a total of $211 for the week.
There are a few other benefits that come with the territory — many of which we never see a price tag. Our textbooks are free, and valued at a conservative $400 per semester. Between hats, shirts, sweatshirts, jumpsuits and shoes, Tech gives us approximately $270 in free clothing during the season.
Freshmen receive a free laptop valued at $1,000, which can be prorated to $100 per semester.
The money adds up fast, especially during bowl season. The Orange Bowl gives players a $300 electronic gift suite, from which to choose any combination of electronics, so long as the total doesn’t exceed the given amount. Players also receive $200 in clothing and luggage. I’m not even including the bowl ring, travel reimbursement to and from the bowl, or the cost of lodging in a four-star hotel.
When we finish playing football, we leave with a degree from Tech — valued at $5,254 per semester for in-state tuition. Tutors are at our disposal and paid for by the athletic department.
In one semester, the benefits total $14,551 per player.
The NCAA limits the work week to 19 hours for student-athletes, which includes practice, meetings and weight-lifting. Over a 20-week season, we put in a total of 380 hours, at an hourly wage of $38.29.
While I understand we don’t have the luxury of allocating that $14,551 however we’d like, what else would we spend it on, other than food, clothes, toys and tuition? Even when we look solely at the cash, we’re in abundance.
A nice apartment in Blacksburg will cost roughly $450 per month, or $2,250 per semester. Purchase a Mega Flex meal plan for $1,459, and your meals are covered. With $5,533 in cash during the fall, this leaves athletes with $1,824 in extra spending money per semester, $364 per month, $81 per week or $12 per day. If someone can’t survive on $12 per day, when food and rent are taken care of, I question the admission process.
Let’s compare this figure to the proposed plan, which would give athletes an additional $1,000 per semester. Players would instead have $2,824 after room and board are paid, $564 per month, $125 per week, or $18 per day.
The money has to come from somewhere.
ESPN’s new contract with the ACC is worth $1.86 billion over 12 years — roughly $12.9 million annually per school. According to an article on Forbes.com, Tech’s athletic department cleared over $14.8 million in profit during the 2009-2010 academic year. However, that figure reflected the profit with the old ESPN contract, worth only $5.5 million.
When an ACC school receives a bid to play in a Bowl Championship Series game, the conference receives roughly $18 million — which is then divided up evenly across all 12 members.
Don’t forget about the merchandise — Tech sells player jerseys for $60 a pop in the bookstore.
What happens with all that leftover cash?
Some of it is reinvested in the football program. Our new $18 million locker room facility and pending $25 million indoor practice facility are prime examples. Who benefits from those?
The remaining cash doesn’t last long at a school where baseball, cross country, golf, lacrosse, men’s and women’s soccer, softball, swimming and diving, men’s and women’s tennis, track and field, volleyball and wrestling don’t generate any revenue. Athletic department faculty and coaches’ salaries, travel expenses, equipment costs and tuition scholarships for these sports are funded by football revenue.
That’s not to say these sports don’t deserve the funding. What would Sunday afternoons in Blacksburg be like without Kelly Conheeney scoring the game-winning goal to beat the eighth-ranked women’s soccer team in the country?
At the end of the day, there simply isn’t enough money to justify paying players anything outside of a scholarship. Even if there was enough dough, the compensation currently received by athletes is more than generous. At some point, we need to accept the fact that we’re in college, and we’re supposed to learn how to stretch a dollar.
Next time someone says to you, “college football players should be paid,” you can respond, “they are.”
