re: Coach Calipari has some suggestions for the NCAA in his new book

Posted by BluegrassBelle

RIP Hefty Lefty - 1981-2019

Member since Nov 2010

99905 posts

Posted on 4/10/14 at 10:49 pm to trident

quote:
I agree with everything besides the $50k loan. This will get a lot of kids in trouble

That and the stipend is probably the only things I couldn't totally get behind.

He's also mentioned recently schools having a stipend for families to be able to travel to see their kids play. Considering it's something that regularly gets brought up in NCAA investigations, anything that eliminates another one of their dumbass rules works for me.

Posted by BayouBengals03

lsu14always

Member since Nov 2007

99999 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 12:00 am to RTR America

Because I want the discussion to continue.

2 ...

Posted by Cap Crunch

Fire Alleva

Member since Dec 2010

54189 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 1:49 am to BayouBengals03

As I said earlier, I just think these extra benefits will be very bad for non-revenue sports. Schools like LSU will be fine, but for some D1 schools that don't turn a huge profit with their ADs, that stipend money is going to add up fast.

That being said, most of the suggestions laid out by Calipari are pretty reasonable.

Posted by RTR America

Memphis, TN

Member since Aug 2012

39600 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 2:14 am to BayouBengals03

quote:
Because I want the discussion to continue.

The kern made me think something had happened to make it more relevant. You had me searching "Calipari" on twitter.

Posted by Jim Rockford

Member since May 2011

98711 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 5:37 am to Na Mean

quote:
• If a coach leaves an institution, players should be able to transfer from that program without having to sit out a season;

As long as they can't transfer to the coach's new school. Back in the day, it was common for a coach to bring his players along with him and leave the former school in shambles.

Posted by TopWaterTiger

Lake Charles, LA

Member since May 2006

10271 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 9:25 am to Jim Rockford

quote:
As long as they can't transfer to the coach's new school. Back in the day, it was common for a coach to bring his players along with him and leave the former school in shambles.

Why not? If the player is there for just the coach and not the school, why does it matter where he transfers to?

I agree with just about everything Cal said.

I'm not sure I agree w the $5000k stipend. I think you should just either let them work, or sell their "brand". Hell if JFF wants to spends hours of his time signing stuff, then he should be allowed to be paid for it. Although that is opening up a shady can of worms.

Posted by Zamoro10

Member since Jul 2008

14743 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 10:04 am to NikolaiJakov

quote:
quote:
Thats 2 billion dollars across all 400k+ NCAA athletes

Bingo.

I could get on board with paying revenue sports a stipend, but with Title IX, there's no way paying athletes is economically possible anymore. That ship has sailed.

Uh...so the athletes would get a 1/5 of the pie.

College sports generates 11 Billion dollars annually by all estimates.

The NCAA just signed a 10.8 Billion dollar deal for March Madness/TV rights.

So yeah, they could pay these players - no ship has sailed - the ship keeps getting more rich by the day.

This post was edited on 4/11/14 at 10:05 am

Posted by AngryBeavers

Member since Jun 2012

4554 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 1:32 pm to Na Mean

quote:
• Players should receive a stipend between $3,000 to $5,000;

This would kill a lot of football programs. That's a lot of players to have to pay and most schools do not make a profit as it is on athletics.

Posted by redfish99

B.R.

Member since Aug 2007

16612 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 1:40 pm to heartbreakTiger

Gestapo Bastids.............

Posted by Keltic Tiger

Baton Rouge

Member since Dec 2006

19480 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 1:48 pm to redfish99

I had to laugh at Calipari's comments bout the NCAA not taking his suggestions. This from a coach whose last 2 college programs had wins vacated & NCAA monies returned because of cheating. Derrick Rose was the national player of the yr, there are only ..what...12-13 players on a roster, and Calipari honestly did not know how Rose was eligble to play? His rep is well earned, and it is not only the NCAA who does not like him; he is intensely disliked by many of his "peers".

2 ...

Posted by WildcatMike

Lexington, KY

Member since Dec 2005

41764 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 2:09 pm to Keltic Tiger

I laugh at the fans who bring up vacated wins

One, Camby was given money by an agent. How is it any different with what is going on with JFF getting money for autographs and half of Bama FB players playing Bowl games after mingling with agents?

Second, the NCAA clearing house ruled Rose eligible, not Memphis. So Cal is not going to play Rose if the NCAA clears him not knowing about an ACT test?

LSU fans sure forget Daddy Dale dirty laundry and with Les and football.

Posted by lynxcat

Member since Jan 2008

24256 posts

Posted on 4/11/14 at 2:22 pm to pvilleguru

Even if schools gets a portion of the endorsements, then I'm cool with it.

Since D1 colleges are on all school deals, the athletes would almost certainly only be able to sign deals with the same company that sponsors the overall school. LSU football player = Nike, Auburn player = UA, etc.