I never want to hear a word about NCAA players needing to being paid. Not only do you get free scholarships, you apparently have enough money to be betting $100 per pickup basketball game and arm wrestling match in the Sanderson.
Paying players
- Thread starter msudawg1994
- Start date
Sounds like you got dunked on and lost your money. Now shut your mouth and take it like a man.
ETA To be clear. I am not in favor of paying players at all... Just don't like people coming on here bitching about our players for something like this.
ETA To be clear. I am not in favor of paying players at all... Just don't like people coming on here bitching about our players for something like this.
Last edited:
Yeah, sounds like you nailed it. But they still don't need to be paid. Most students pay to be tortured; athletes get paid to a great extent to live the good life, even in college.
Are you going to pay the tennis team the same amount? The softball women? Prepare thy anus for endless lawsuits if you don't....
R
RPOdawg
Guest
I think all of the proposals out there suggest doing exactly this. The amount of money they’d be getting in addition to the scholarships wouldn’t be life changing, but would cover additional things like meals and provide some “walking around money” that athletes rarely get to acquire by any other means due to the time investments required by classes and their practice / training schedule.
Personally, I’m against it because it will kill the smaller sports. Those are already all money losers, and adding this additional financial commitment to those athletes will just push more schools towards dropping those sports altogether in order to cut their losses.
People keep saying this but it’s not true.
If an athlete is going hungry, it’s their own fault. They have free access to way more food than the average college student including some wealthy ones.
They get rent money each month if they don’t live on campus.
They get a stipend also for “walking around money”. Is it a lot? Maybe not but when you factor in not having to pay for meals, rent, etc. it’s way better than the average college student. It’s a whole lot better than some college students.
It always gets me when ESPN runs some story or interview about a D1 scholarship football player having to go hungry to push their pay agenda. About 30 seconds of research on student athlete benefits and facilities will prove that it's a complete fabrication.
-If you are on full scholarship- your education is paid for, your room and board is paid for, and you receive a very nominal amount for incidentals/living expenses.
-If you are not on full scholarship- you pay for your education, you pay for your room and board, and you figure out how to pay for incidentals/living expenses.
For this, the university gets tens of millions in revenue to show you on TV, use you in advertising(to gain even more revenue), and to drive interest in the school.
I cant imagine a scenario like this in the professional world where someone was in such high demand and yet gave up so much and received so little in return(relative to what was gained due to them).
The real issue is that fans have driven college athletics to the point where teams must be run professionally and simply as an extra-curricular extension of the university. Because of this reality that’s been driven by fans, college athletics is no longer what it once was. It’s the quintessential having your cake and eating it too situation. Fans want the size and scope of current college athletics, but they also want the quaint good old days where someone played a sport in college because they loved it and wanted to proudly represent their university.
That **** cant co-exist and we have seen the absurdity of it trying to co-exist for the last 10+ years.
Nobody here, if they are even half smart, would think it’s a good deal to get a Marketing degree from MSU in exchange for MSU earning millions based on your talents, image, and promotion.
There are plenty of details that can be argued to bog down and blur the big picture(players get exposure and improve, players wouldnt otherwiese be at MSU, etc etc). Those are both legitimate points AND missing the point.
Nobody here, if they are even half smart, would think it’s a good deal to get a Marketing degree from MSU in exchange for MSU earning millions based on your talents, image, and promotion.
^^^^This is where I am. I don't think that it is the fact that athletes "need walking around money". I view it as a business agreement. If the university makes money off of me, i want a cut of that money. The money the the big time athletic program brings into the university FAR outweighs what a student receives in tuition, room, and board. A perfect example is Coach Schaefer. Women's basketball tourney runs over the past few years gave MSU free (positive) publicity for ALL across the nation. simply making a national championship doesn't get you the money, it's the free marketing and publicity that it brings that makes you the money. We paid the man because the product he presented brought positive national attention.
^^^^This is where I am. I don't think that it is the fact that athletes "need walking around money". I view it as a business agreement. If the university makes money off of me, i want a cut of that money. The money the the big time athletic program brings into the university FAR outweighs what a student receives in tuition, room, and board. A perfect example is Coach Schaefer. Women's basketball tourney runs over the past few years gave MSU free (positive) publicity for ALL across the nation. simply making a national championship doesn't get you the money, it's the free marketing and publicity that it brings that makes you the money. We paid the man because the product he presented brought positive national attention.
Why can't it co-exist? It has been co-existing since forever.
The problem is, you cannot find a boogeyman to blame this on. You will probably point to the NCAA, but even they do not have shareholders. We are stuck.
The only way to make it work is to allow players to make money off their likeness. Problem solved.
That is not good enough for professional agitators, unfortunately. They will not stop until college sports are destroyed.
They do not have to play college sports if they do not want. Your point is nonsense.
The money from revenue sports outweigh what is spent on the student athletes in those sports, but that doesn't mean the average student athlete is getting less than what they generate.
First, a lot of that revenue is really generated by the school. Minor league baseball teams, D-League basketball teams, and arena league or CFL or whatever you consider the minors for football don't generate a lot of tv money, and the wnba loses money. So most of the value is generated by loyalty to the school, not by the skill of the athletes and the only athletes that can credibly claim to be getting screwed are men's basketball and football.
Second, for most sports, the majority of the value is generated by the superstars, so even if some of the superstar college athletes are getting screwed, that doesn't mean the average athlete in a revenue sport isn't getting a good deal.
I am for players getting paid more, maybe have an additional fund for football and men's basketball that can be spread around as part of recruiting packages once a minimum number of full scholarships are handed out. That would be more equitable, but would probably take federal legislation clarifying that it's ok to pay differently for sports that are profitable and have a profitable equivalent professional league.
I can at least understand that ESPN is pushing there poor ole student athlete agenda to make money......oh the irony.
But when posters come on here and regurgitate that stupid crap (anything they see or hear including that mullen didn't run counter/misdirection plays), it baffles me. Are they really that dumb or just that lazy?
But when posters come on here and regurgitate that stupid crap (anything they see or hear including that mullen didn't run counter/misdirection plays), it baffles me. Are they really that dumb or just that lazy?
Steven Godfrey, deep down, is pushing the same pay for play agenda, not an anti-MSU one.
Best points I have seen on this subject.
Allowing the best players to go pro at any time would solve a lot of this.
Paying players would drive a lot of schools out of sports. How much do you pay them? Who all get's paid? It would not stop with football. All sports would end up having to get paid. That's a lot of money., You think hot dogs cost too much now. Just wait until paying players happen.
I never said anyone in this thread did but it has been implied before on this site by some posters.
And a poster absolutely implied they needed some extra money for meals (they don’t) and that they would get some “walking around money” (they already do).
And a poster absolutely implied they needed some extra money for meals (they don’t) and that they would get some “walking around money” (they already do).
If you thought it was a good idea to bet against SEC athletes in any athletic competition, you kinda get what you get.
Earning millions? Those profits aren’t going into someone’s pocket besides for a salary.
That money is absolutely used to better the university including sports and academics.
But here’s the kicker. You start paying football players and basketball players based on the revenue each sports earns then you are absolutely going to have to pay soccer, softball, baseball, etc.
You explain how that will work financially for the better of the university as a whole and I’ll look at it objectively.
And what exactly are these athletes giving up? Yeah they work harder than the average student in some instances, but they absolutely get something in return for that.
They also don’t have to get a marketing degree unless your implying that most aren’t smart enough to get a degree that is guaranteed to get them a good job when they don’t make nfl.
They also have the choice of not going to college. Given that choice they choose what they have every time and it’s way better than what most college students get.
That money is absolutely used to better the university including sports and academics.
But here’s the kicker. You start paying football players and basketball players based on the revenue each sports earns then you are absolutely going to have to pay soccer, softball, baseball, etc.
You explain how that will work financially for the better of the university as a whole and I’ll look at it objectively.
And what exactly are these athletes giving up? Yeah they work harder than the average student in some instances, but they absolutely get something in return for that.
They also don’t have to get a marketing degree unless your implying that most aren’t smart enough to get a degree that is guaranteed to get them a good job when they don’t make nfl.
They also have the choice of not going to college. Given that choice they choose what they have every time and it’s way better than what most college students get.
I’m glad we aren’t jumping to conclusions or anything!! Just for clarity, since we have a lot of people who can’t think for themselves on here, it was not me playing against them. It was the players playing against themselves. I just witnessed it. And please get the BS out of here about how they don’t live a better life. They are riding around in their nice cars with everything paid for, and then are given stipends ( which amounts to $5,000 a year per football player )on top of that for “walking around money.” Ask any normal college student and they will feel the same way.If you thought it was a good idea to bet against SEC athletes in any athletic competition, you kinda get what you get.
Last edited:
It cant co-exist in harmony. There will always be an imbalance. Hope that better explains my view.
I do not think that fans can genuinely have the size and scope of current athletics while also having the quaint good old days where students played for the college because they loved and and wanted to proudly represent dear old State.
You say this has been co-existing forever? No way is that accurate. Its been a wild imbalance that has ramped up over the last decade as college sports has become a bigger business than ever.
Players rarely give a **** where they play- this shows they view it as a business. They view it as a means to an end. They view it as what will they get out of the situation.
This is TOTALLY different from students playing for the love of the game and to proudly represent their university.
Thus- it cant co-exist.
Look at the insane transfer list each year in college basketball that has grown exponentially in the last decade.
Players are assassins- they are looking for the best setup for themselves regardless of where or who they play for. That is the antithesis of proudly representing and loyally playing for dear old State(how many fans view the system should be).
I am fine with players making money off their likeness. Itll affect probably 2% of all college athletes.
As for your rant about not finding a boogeyman- there needn’t be one in physical form. The boogeyman is greed. Greed by the NCAA to retain power and control. Greed by universities to push for more revenues and athletics expansion. Greed by fans to demand more professional looking infrastructure at the college level. Greed by fans and schools to demand often times impossible results(only 1 team can win it all each year, after all).
Greed is absolutely at the core of all this. No group is just happy to have what they have- they all greedily want more.
I had to work at the texaco down in the ghetto while I was in school,and 20 years later im still paying back that student loan. They have it pretty good.
Just because that guy was a football player (Baker Swedenburg I presume), does not make his opinion any more or less valid than VegasDawg13. Most football players think they are being done wrong.
How would he know about a regular student's life? In the same vein, how would a regular student, such as VegasDawg13, know about a football player's life?
You haven't said anything that makes me think the system cannot continue as it is right now. It is co-existing just fine. If fans want to talk about the glory of the school, they can. If players want to transfer and treat it like a business, they can. What's the problem?
The answer is still do NOT pay them anything additional at this time. Just remove all limits to what they can earn on their own and the schools can not be involved with that at all.
Thats a pretty ******** qualification- besides salary. So besides the gargantuan number of people being paid and relying on the system growing, the profits arent going into someone's pocket. Brilliant.
Yes, it is being used to better the university overall. Whether that betterment is measurable in many instances is debatable. Spending 10mm on a practice facility when 5mm would get one that is just as serviceable perhaps isnt bettering the university. The counter argument is that if 10mm isnt spent, then the facility isnt as nice as other university's facilities and that then hurts potential for more revenue due to talent deciding to go elsewhere for the nicer ****. That circular argument just feeds right back into the reality that money often isnt spent to better the university- its just being spent to keep the machine moving.
Yes. That really isnt some shocking revelation. Pay em. Pay em all. Pay em evenly or pay em based on some algorithm based scale. Its how life outside college works- more popular sports typically pay more. Whichever system is chosen- the devil would be in the details.
No idea if it would better the university or not. I clearly am not looking at this from the university's perspective. The university(all of em, in general) has made out like bandits for decades now, so i wont cry for them.
I also dont cry for coal companies that exploited employees for decades with scrip and poor working conditions. ***no, i am not suggesting college athletes are treated like coal miners from 100 years ago.***
Of course they are getting something in return for that. It should be quite clear that many view what they get in return as not being enough.
I dont even know what to say to this comment. Its confusing and i think you misunderstood a point i made in an earlier post. I am aware that not all college athletes must get a marketing degree. I am not implying most arent smart enough to get a degree thatll get them a job post playing career...thats quite the conclusion jump you made.
My point was that the cost of a marketing degree doesnt equal the value many athletes bring the university. Thats all.
Yup- and I am a huge fan of athletes being able to play for pay at the college age. The GLeague for basketball. Overseas for basketball. The minors for baseball. Golf and Tennis are already set up to allow teens to play for pay.
The 1 Yuge sport that this cant happen for- football- just so happens to also be the biggest revenue sport for college. You need to be 3 years removed from high school for the NFL and Maurice Clarett says thats for sure true. So people are stuck and colleges know there is no other realistic option for them- so there is no incentive to change the setup to make it more equitable for the student athlete.
Ask yourself this question.
If your choices were:
A. Graduate with a degree you choose with $30k plus in debt while also having say a 20 hr a week job
Or
B. Get a scholarship and be a student athlete by your choice and work on a degree you choose and have all expenses paid and graduate with no debt and the experience and extra work that came with being a student athlete
What would you choose?
Most people who don’t have the money to pay for college are choosing option B every time.
If your choices were:
A. Graduate with a degree you choose with $30k plus in debt while also having say a 20 hr a week job
Or
B. Get a scholarship and be a student athlete by your choice and work on a degree you choose and have all expenses paid and graduate with no debt and the experience and extra work that came with being a student athlete
What would you choose?
Most people who don’t have the money to pay for college are choosing option B every time.
In that extremely limited and guided question, sure I would choose option B.
Not sure why you think you made a point with this post though.