re: Jay Bilas calls out the NCAA's hypocrisy.

There's an argument that SOME student athletes don't get fair compensation for the revenue they bring in but the VAST majority are compensated well above the revenue thats brought in. In 2010/2011 year only 22 D1 Athletic Depts. were in the black (per USA today) You think a CFB @ Utah State is not fairly compensated? How bout a womens soccer player @ Arizona State? How much revenue does she bring in compared the compensation she recieves from the university?

Rember Title IX is FEDERAL law that has nothing to do with the NCAA. Any compesation package has to be across the board.You cannot compensate for higher levels of "play" or revenue brought in to the school.

quote:

---

It's not compelling because you are paid in DOLLARS. These athletes are paid in assets that CANNOT be liquidated.

---

First of all, these athletes are given stipends. In case you don't know what a stipend is, think of it as fancy word for allowance. In other words, they are given money by their schools already independent of tuition, room, board, etc.

Also, a degree in field of study is an asset than can be used (liquidated) to gain currency.

quote:

---

"As long as you're in the NCAA, we have the right to sell your likeness."
"Ok, what about when I'm not in the NCAA anymore?"

---

When they sign it they agree they can use their likeness in perpetuity. While I think that is a terrible deal for the athletes, its what they agreed to. You agreed to the terms when you signed the contract. It's not the NCAA's fault you don't like those terms down the road.

quote:

---

The argument that the student athletes generate revenue for the university at a rate that exceeds fair compensation of a full athletic scholarship is correct.

---

No its not. For a guy like a Clowney or Manziel, sure. But when you average it out to all athletes in all the ADs and consider that less than two dozen ADs even break even in a given year, it just further destroys that argument.

quote:

---

The issue could be quickly fixed allowing athletes to hold jobs and to be able to profit from any game they created for themselves by playing at a high level

---

Are you so naive not to see how ripe that is for corruption. Hell rather than having a booster hook up a player's mom with a sweet gig, they'll now being paying a player $50k a year to "work" at their law firm or whatever.

quote:

---

Would some schools be at a disadvantage yes, but then their boosters, fans and alumni should work harder to provide opportunities to entice better athletes.

---

frick that. This are 18 year olds who already have huge egos and very little of a world view.

quote:

---

If an individual or business wants to give an athlete money for a "job" or just because then there is no law being broken in a legal sense.

---

This was the only part of your post with some real substance. I'm going to post my idea/solution for all of this tomorrow.

quote:

---

I work for Home Depot and my job is specifically to work with contractors and developers. I bring over 1M thru my desk alone but my salary is less than 5% of that.

---

So much bs. I'm guessing you work the Pro Desk. You don't bring that money in. 95% of that money at minimum was going to come in whether or not you were there. Most Home Depots see an average of 20% of their store revenues come through their Pro Desks. You aren't providing any unique service that another glorified cashier couldn't provided. And don't try to bullshite me either. You are getting 40 hours a week at least $10 an hour. You knew the deal when you took that job there. You think you have it hard there where you are guaranteed your salary for checking out orders and setting pick lists, then come work in commission sales.

I'm surprised someone hasn't tried to start a student athlete union. Thank god they haven't.

quote:

---

I'm surprised someone hasn't tried to start a student athlete union. Thank god they haven't.

---

This would be a decade-long crusade at least. When you're only allowed to be a student athlete for four or five years, why spend all that time fighting for a reward that you'll be to old to reap once it exists?

Same reason the 21 drinking age won't change. I felt no need to spend 10 years trying to change a law so that 18 year olds could drink when I'd reached my late 20's.

Violates federal law.

quote:

---

So maybe it's been addressed already, but what would be the problem with giving athletes a portion of merchadise sales with their name on it? That seems like the easiest remedy. Have a set fee. athlete makes $ based on his popularity and volume vs some qualitative view. Double standard with the NCAA is gone.

---

How is that different than paying them? First thing coaches say to a recruit is "Look up our jersey sales, we are in 1000 stores domestic and 300 internationally" said John Calipari

"We got a guy with deep pockets who will buy 500 jerseys when you step on campus" said Nick Saban.

"We are gonna market you as the bad boy of the team, we'll have a love triangle with you the quarterback and the captain of the softball team. Jerseys will be flying off the racks" said Urban Meyer.

How about players arguing about shelf space at the team apparel store? You think college players do dumb shite now, imagine what twitter will be like when players have a financial incentive to make news. Sorry but paying players with jersey sales is a really stupid idea.

$37 million? According to who? Their attendence was basicall the same as 2011 (without Manziel) TV revenue changed but it had NOTHING to do with Manziel. Texas A&M was going to get their TV revenue if Manziel never played a down.So we know the $37 million didn't come from gate reciepts and TV revenue. Where did it come from? Did contributions to the AD go up $37 million?I
highly doubt it. How bout merchindise sales? You REALLY think they made $37 million (profit) off Manziel
merchindise? Really? Do you know how many jersey's you have to sell to make $37 million?

Sorry,calling TOTAL BS on your figures.

solid work NCAA

Such a sham