- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why does society perceive playing football earns the right of payment?
Posted on 12/6/18 at 4:39 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 12/6/18 at 4:39 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Based on current system there is no reason to pay college players beyond morality.
They cannot play for the NFL out of high school. That’s the NFLs rule.
There is no other league that will pay them.
They don’t have leverage to demand payment.
The problem is schools WANT to pay players.
They want to be able to use their resources to gain a competitive advantage.
Also there is an arguement that these schools are raking in Million and millions on the backs of these players, and maybe they should get a taste.
Very succinct and rationale explanation based on supply and demand.
0
Posted on 12/6/18 at 4:58 pm to Cap Crunch
quote:
Probably because the sport generates millions upon millions in revenue each year
Think of it this way. There are something like 10,000 college football players just in the FBS at any given time.
Roughly a third of them are draft eligible in a given year, so out of roughly 3,300 players, only 300 make an active roster or the practice squad. So at best, we’re talking 10% of college football players will ever get any money for playing professionally, and a lot of those guys will only play for a season or two.
If you take the best eight, nine or ten players off of every team in the FBS, the NCAA is still going to make millions. People will still watch their team if a handful of starters disappear. The value added by any of them individually is next to nothing.
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 5:49 pm to StupidBinder
I'm not even sure what side you're on at this point. It doesn't matter how many are good enough to play in the NFL, the public is already paying millions to watch them play. That is why people think they deserve to be paid. Its irrelevant how many of them go to the NFL if people are already paying for the product that they are producing.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:00 pm to Cap Crunch
quote:
the public is already paying millions to watch them play.
College football fans aren’t paying to watch players. They pay to watch their team. That’s my point. The vast majority of the players in and of themselves are not producing that revenue.
The fact that most of them can’t get paid playing professionally is completely relevant because, in a free market society, that’s what dictates how much one should get paid.
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 6:01 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:00 pm to Tshiz
quote:
When did everyone forget that playing football is completely VOLUNTARY. No one is making these kids play the game.
Paying players is also voluntary. No one is making people pay players, people are happy to do that on their own.
That's the issue. You have a willing payer, a willing payee and a rule that stands in between what would naturally happen.
Coaches don't have that rule. That's the difference.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:02 pm to StupidBinder
quote:teams would have more control over player development. Probably not nearly enough incentive by itself to get a league started but definitely an incentive
But the NFL is already getting all of that from college football without having to prop up a farm system.
quote:this I feel pretty certain of. The current recruiting industry is a hundred million dollar business. People know who kids are when they are 14. People would watch nolan smith and derek stingley and kayvon thibodeaux wherever they play. Especially if given legitimacy by the NFL
And I’m skeptical of how many people would actually watch.
Call it the NFL development league. Allow it to draft high school players and college players. Put it on TV Saturdays. I think that would work well and pretty much completely end the NCAA as a major sport organization
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 6:05 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:10 pm to StupidBinder
quote:
They pay to watch their team.
Which is made up of players
quote:
The fact that most of them can’t get paid playing professionally is completely relevant because, in a free market society, that’s what dictates how much one should get paid.
In a free market society, people are paid based on what people are willing to pay for their service. I'm not sure how you don't get this.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:15 pm to Cap Crunch
quote:
In a free market society, people are paid based on what people are willing to pay for their service. I'm not sure how you don't get this.
Are you being willfully obtuse?
How much is the second string long snapper for Wyoming going to get paid in a free market and who’s going to pay him?
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:16 pm to Tshiz
Glamour
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:21 pm to Cap Crunch
So how would all of the "pay players their market value" people define eligibility? How would the NFL be any different than the NCAA? Could a player go back to school and play college ball after going "pro"?
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:25 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
this I feel pretty certain of. The current recruiting industry is a hundred million dollar business. People know who kids are when they are 14. People would watch nolan smith and derek stingley and kayvon thibodeaux wherever they play. Especially if given legitimacy by the NFL
Call it the NFL development league. Allow it to draft high school players and college players. Put it on TV Saturdays. I think that would work well and pretty much completely end the NCAA as a major sport organization
The recruiting industry is huge, but the money changing hands revolves around camps, training facilities, rating services etc. People are paying to get their kids exposure or figure out which kids are worth offering. People aren’t paying to actually watch them play.
I just don’t see 18 year olds and marginally good former college players being that big of a draw. If they were, more people would tune in to watch the Under Armor AA game. Or they’d just pay to get more HS games televised. Maybe it could be viable but it would be absolutely dwarfed by CFB. Bama fans aren’t going to stop watching Bama play and instead go watch Tua play on a team they have no affiliation with.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:25 pm to Tshiz
quote:
Why does society perceive playing football earns the right of payment?
Because it's total horseshite that the NCAA and schools pretend these are amateur athletes. The schools are making money hand over fist off their backs and have created an artificial barrier stopping the players from properly reaching their earning potential. Saying "Well they get paid with a scholarship, room and board, and an "education" that may or may not be worth the paper the diploma is printed on is a farce.
Johnny Manziel should have been given a piece of every single one of those #2 jerseys A&M sold b/c he is the only damn reason people were buying that number.
It should be fine for USC to get a home and job for Reggie Bush's mother just like can happen when a company headhunts a high level worker from another part of the country.
Jeremy Bloom should have been able to keep playing WR at Colorado while taking sponsorships to fund his Olympic free style skiing career.
The NCAA even made UCF kick returner Donald De La Haye shut down his fricking YoutTube page b/c he was popular enough to earn money off of it.
This is all total bullshite. Let players earn money off their likeness. Let them take sponsors. Let schools better their entire family if they want a student that badly. Let them earn money from side jobs they are talented at.
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 6:31 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:27 pm to Tshiz
There is no perception. College football players receive payment every year, it’s just under the table and in the form of scholarships
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:37 pm to StupidBinder
quote:that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm more talking about how people are interested in where these 18 year olds are going to play. So much so, that they pay people for information on where they are likely to choose to play. People are actively interested in these kids. Admittingly this is not the same situation but look at Zion Williamson. He is arguably the single most popular athlete in this country to people under the age of 22. He didnt get there because of Duke. He got there because we as a society care about celebrities and individuals over groups. I believe that would carry over for football as well
People are paying to get their kids exposure or figure out which kids are worth offering.
quote:but it wouldnt just be 18 year olds and marginally good college players. It would be the same wcacr thing to what we have now...plus marginally good college players
I just don’t see 18 year olds and marginally good former college players being that big of a draw
quote:and this is where I disagree. The very second college football gets marginalized it turns into college baseball, in my opinion at least
Maybe it could be viable but it would be absolutely dwarfed by CFB. Bama fans aren’t going to stop watching Bama play and instead go watch Tua play on a team they have no affiliation with.
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 6:39 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:47 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
So how would all of the "pay players their market value" people define eligibility? How would the NFL be any different than the NCAA? Could a player go back to school and play college ball after going "pro"?
Drop the prohibition against athletes profiting from their likenesses from nonuniversity sources. That's it. Market value determines the rest.
Players turn pro when they declare. If drafted, they are pros. If not, they have an option to return to college if a scholarship exists to take or they walk on. Up to the school as to whether they want to leave open scholarships for that potential.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:51 pm to Tshiz
Do you get paid when you go to work?
No one is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to be there? You voluntarily show up everyday.
Why does your job deserve payment and theirs doesn’t?
No one is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to be there? You voluntarily show up everyday.
Why does your job deserve payment and theirs doesn’t?
Posted on 12/6/18 at 6:53 pm to StupidBinder
quote:
no viable way for an 18 yo to get paid to play football.
Not sure if this would need its own thread or not but I had a thought today. I looked at the Tiger vs Phil matchup and read it had an estimated 750,000 viewers. I then looked at some of college footballs highest rated games so far this season. There was a vast range from as high as 13MM viewers down to let’s just say 400M. Keeping the spirit of competition, rewarding players and encouraging players to stay with their teams through bowl games I had a thought.
The regular season is what it is. But teams are playing to get into the CFP. I’d be curious to see posters thoughts on making Bowl games/CFP games Pay Per View events. Hypothetically, let’s say 1MM viewers (very conservative number IMO) at $10/event. With teams having 85 per roster that would total 170 players. If it were just split to the players that’s roughly $58M per athlete. We know it wouldn’t shake out that way so let’s say $30M to each player and the remaining amount is totaled up and donated to the school.
In my opinion, it keeps the regular season what it is today and rewards programs that do well. Hell, you could even opt to say a portion of the “extra donated to school amount” is distributed to a fund to help all D1 programs. I also feel this becomes even better by “spreading the wealth” and expanding the CFP to more teams. Let’s just say expand to 8. Even if the team I root for made it through each round, as a consumer I would be more than willing to fork over $10/game to watch. Hell I pay more than that to watch fight events and I’m not even a fan.
Curious what other options people may have around this or if it has any possibility of working. For? Against? Let’s hear it.
This post was edited on 12/6/18 at 7:10 pm
Posted on 12/6/18 at 7:21 pm to Rep520
quote:
Drop the prohibition against athletes profiting from their likenesses from nonuniversity sources. That's it. Market value determines the rest.
Players turn pro when they declare.
So if you can be paid to play football for LSU, how are you not already a pro.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 7:34 pm to teke184
quote:
That effectively ties up where you can be for a minimum of 4 years (3 of med school, at least 1 of residency) before you have any real input on where you can practice.
Longer. Med school is 4 years. Residency is 5. And many doctors also do fellowships after residency for 1-2 years. It’s a long process.
Posted on 12/6/18 at 8:08 pm to Hester Carries
quote:
So if you can be paid to play football for LSU, how are you not already a pro.
You can be paid to play football for LSU right now. The issue isn't that, it's whether getting paid makes you ineligible.
All I propose is dropping the ineligibilty part if a player gets $ from a non-university source.
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News