re: Eric Reid's quote

quote:

---

So you admit they are compensated for their work

---

Sure ... and they are compensated a lot. They don't need to be paid.

quote:

---

So how much do you suggest they make? 25K a year in scholarship money and another 10K in food, housing and textbooks for a grand total of about 35K a year isn't enough?

---

It definitely isn't enough. Just my opinion, but I agree with Spurrier and think he is dead on with a couple of those quotes. Look at what they do for the schools and cities. Most people don't give a shite about some undergrad that has to take out a student loan to get a history degree, but those people care about players making plays.

I'm not sure how to put a number on it, but I completely agree with Spurrier in opening up a discussion about it.

this isnt even a Title IX issue
think of all the other mens teams each school would have to pay. some schools probably have 15-20 other sports just for the men

could LSU swing it? probably. but only a handful of athletic depts turn a profit currently, what would addding hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe millions to their expenses do?

then you have to look at 1-aa, d2, etc...

then what happens if we hit a stretch like the mid90s? several bad seasons- sales go down across the board, then what happens to the budget

Valid response there

quote:

---

I'd venture to say their work does not bring nearly the notoriety to the school that a Patrick Peterson does.

---

Of course it doesn't

George, where do you think the entirety of the football program's profits should go?

quote:

---

So while many many students have to take out loans and leave college with huge debt, football players leave with no debt, have a scholarship that if they keep all 4 years is worth well over $100K and a degree that they can use to make money in the workplace after they graduate from a state university.

No way they should be paid. Their books, housing and food is all paid for too while enrolled.

---

Double edged sword, IMO.

You have a point and there's an argument for the players as well. They bring in a MASSIVE amount of money to the athletic program that funds other parts of the university.

Without those guys, there's no product on the field.


At the same time, your argument is solid as well.

quote:

---

Les is smart. He knows the NCAA will never allow paying players. Signing off on that was basically free PR.

---

first thing I thought of when I read ab Spurrier's idea. And ironic that Chiz was one of the coaches to vote against.

Agree totally.

And I do not think this idea that the individual players are being exploited holds water. Do people buy jerseys with PPs number, AJ Green's, number, etc? Sure they do. But if PP or AJ had never enrolled, people would buy just as many jerseys. The team is comprised of individual players but exists just the same without any specific one of them.

Also, the idea it will curb cheating is ludicrous. Most cheating isn't about getting $30 to go out on a Thursday night. It's about getting a car, jewelry, house for family, etc. Giving a few hundred buck a month won't stop it. Hell, no matter how much you give, it won't stop the cheating.

quote:

---

GeorgeTheGreek

---

rofl rofl. stfu dude. 35k a year for a 99.9 percentile athlete is a fricking joke. These players do more than 35k a year's worth of good for the school they play for.

quote:

---

Are they not receiving some sort of stipend to live on?

---

They receive more than they need and have extra "spending" money from such stipends.