Should College Athletes be paid?

no they would all make the same amount

probably low hundreds per month

not thousands cause i know most schools couldnt afford that
 
low hundreds? if you're going all sports not a chance..

it'd be closer to 25 bucks a month per individual if you're going by a mid level athletic program.

think about it, 200 a month lets say..you're dealing with JUST 100 or so athletes..

you think an athletic department has 20K off excess money a month?
 
I don't see what the problem is. If its 20$ a month thats fine. Theyre still getting a percentage of profit they essentially advertised and busted their@%+ for. Its not like the super star kids will cease to get their royalties.

Not really buying the free edcucation argument. Education is expensive, for the student. Not for the university.
 
Originally Posted by 5dividedby4

I'm guessing all the dudes that have said no have never played a sport in college.
Click to expand...

QFT i dont think they realize how much time it really takes up

but i think it could only work in the FBS division, more money availble for the most part
 
Originally Posted by 5dividedby4

I'm guessing all the dudes that have said no have never played a sport in college.
Click to expand...
Im guessing all the dudes that said yes have never had to pay for their college education before.
 
So many teams wouldn't be able to dish out money like that. The only teams in women's basketball that would be able to pay players would be UConn andTennessee. And think of I-AA football teams, there's no way they could pay all 80+ kids on the roster with their weak income.
 
It would be unfair to small colleges, and would screw up recruiting.

Plus, free education isn't something to sneeze at. They already come out at least 40,000 ahead of most kids (and often much more), and honestly,they're just playing a sport. Sports aren't everything, and I already think it's ridiculous how much athletes get paid.
 
Originally Posted by The Yes Guy

It would be unfair to small colleges, and would screw up recruiting.

Plus, free education isn't something to sneeze at. They already come out at least 40,000 ahead of most kids (and often much more), and honestly, they're just playing a sport. Sports aren't everything, and I already think it's ridiculous how much athletes get paid.
Click to expand...


A student athlete is going to make more money for the school than the average student especially at a major program. I don't think people realize how muchmoney these athletes make for universities.
 
It's easy to say that student athletes shouldn't be getting paid, but when you look at how much the universities bring in because of the footballsquad, it just seems like they should get a cut...

TV contracts + BCS births every year = Millions and millions of dollars
 
I think a lot of y'all are confusing profits with revenues. By the time you subtract all of the expenses (salaries, tuition for the students, studenthousing, meal plans, tutors for the students, maintaining facilities, travel for road games...), losses, etc., a lot of these athletic departments are barelybreaking even, if not taking a loss.

Sure, the football team may be bringing in a $20 million profit, but that profit is taken and used to fund the sports like womens' basketball, softball,womens' soccer, swimming and diving teams, etc.... all of which operate on pretty big losses.

I know for a fact that Texas A&M only has two profitable sports, and the athletic department has been operating on a loss for a long time.

There are really only a handful of programs that, all sports considered, are operating in the black.

TV contracts + BCS births every year = Millions and millions of dollars

Most of the time the teams participating only get their expenses covered, with the rest of the money being split up among all of the schools in that athleticconference. For instance, in the Big 12, the usual bowl game payouts would be somewhere around $15-20 million (assuming 8 bowl-eligible teams, with 1 BCSteam). Take away the expenses for those teams to travel (we'll just say around $1 million total to make it easy, even though it's probably much largerthan that), the teams in the conference are still only getting about a little north of $1.1 million each.

It's a good thought that these kids should be paid...but in reality it's just not possible. The athletic departments are already giving these kids$40,000+ for tuition (getting a scholarship is an opportunity that they probably wouldn't have if it weren't for their athletic talent), and all of theperks that goes along with that scholarship; housing, meal plans, pretty much free access to nutritional supplements and trainers/dietitians, free tutoring,etc. If you wanna get deep down into it, scholarships are one of an athletic department's biggest expenses, and one of the main reasons most schoolsoperate on a loss.
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by Al3xis

No, because..

do you pay the QB at a Texas and Florida and not the Qb at a Toledo or San diego state?

You pay only the stars and not the kids who never see the court or field.

you only pay the basketball and football players?

Just DI?

It's not possible.

Did Melo deserve to be paid for all the money he brought in his 1 year? Yeah...did Craig Forth need a cut of that championship money? hell no.
Click to expand...
 
Its not about being fair its about buisiness...

If you go to a small school that cant afford to pay its athletes then that clearly means that school dosent generate enough revenue....witch means you neededto be a better player in order to make a bigger program....if your not helping generate revenue then NO you should not get paid....lol....its a simple conceptfolks

this can be decided by the coaches and athletic director as to witch players are apart of a payout...same as they decide witch players get a scholarship

if you are apart of the reason why a program generates revenue then you should get a piece

Im sure socialist would like everyone to get paid the same but as of now we still operate in a free society.....so the better you are the harder you = the moreyou get paid and rewarded.
 
Originally Posted by HipHopDoc09

I mean most of them get to school for free and a lot of athletes get "special" help as far as grades

I dont think they should be paid
Click to expand...

This
 
No not at all. If you start paying "COLLEGE AND AMETUR(sp?)" athletes, then where is the line drawn? what's a professional and what isn't?
 
Originally Posted by badboyf0life420

no .. that's what makes college sports so competitive. most of the time these athletes are playing hard to make it in the NFL,NBA etc.
Click to expand...

QFT. thats why i love college sports. they play with so much passion and heart.

so no they shouldnt get paid.
 
a non profit (NCAA) has a just in basketball a $5 billion dollars in tv contracts. The math aint adding if the athletes aint getting none.
 
I remember reading an article a while back about Notre Dame football. They said after ALL expenses including coaches salaries, scholarships, travel etc thatthe football team grossed almost $21 million in profit. So I think there is a little something left over for the girls soccer team or anyone else. My opinionis that its done on a school by school basis. Take the total profit that ther athletic department generates, pick a percentage, then divide it by the totalnumber of student athletes at the school. As far as people saying an education isnt cheap, lets assume that the average 4 year player costs $150k to go toschool. First off $ 150k is the RETAIL price for the education, not the actual cost of the scholarship. I would have no idea what the actual cost would be ,but i would guess its maybe half of that. Even so, at a large athletic university a guy like say Tyler Hansborough is worth miuch more and generates much moremoney then his scholarship value. So maybe with the percentages, an athlete at UNC might get $250 a week, but an athlete at UNC Greensborough might only get$50 a week due to the amount of profit generated
 
Being on the clock while not being on the clock FTW....

nerd.gif
 
Originally Posted by bostonmarc

I remember reading an article a while back about Notre Dame football. They said after ALL expenses including coaches salaries, scholarships, travel etc that the football team grossed almost $21 million in profit. So I think there is a little something left over for the girls soccer team or anyone else. My opinion is that its done on a school by school basis. Take the total profit that ther athletic department generates, pick a percentage, then divide it by the total number of student athletes at the school. As far as people saying an education isnt cheap, lets assume that the average 4 year player costs $150k to go to school. First off $ 150k is the RETAIL price for the education, not the actual cost of the scholarship. I would have no idea what the actual cost would be , but i would guess its maybe half of that. Even so, at a large athletic university a guy like say Tyler Hansborough is worth miuch more and generates much more money then his scholarship value. So maybe with the percentages, an athlete at UNC might get $250 a week, but an athlete at UNC Greensborough might only get $50 a week due to the amount of profit generated
Click to expand...
so then you create built in recruiting advantages. a nightmare.


It is not possible, you guys can create all the ideas you want. not happening.

The ONLY plausible thing i could see is if TV networks and shoe companies step in and give back $ for what they've generated...and that has no chance ofhappening, either.

and AD and coaches picking who gets paid?
roll.gif
. Lawsuits waiting to happen.
 
They're already getting paid tens of thousands of dollars. At most schools, if they're lucky, only one or two programs are really profitable. At most,pay a stipend. A small one. To cover "incidentals" like cell phones, eating out on occasion, clothes, etc. Make it voluntary cuz mostschools/programs aren't going to be able to offer a stipend. Yes, it'll create some recruiting advantage, but it's not like they don't existalready. If it's small enough, it shouldn't cause that much of a problem. Grad students and a few others get "stipends" for"working" for the University so that's the argument I'd use to keep them "amateurs".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom