BuffG
Well-Known Member
http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/co...ules-longhorns-will-pay-each-player-10000.ece
This is remuneration outside of scholarships.
This is remuneration outside of scholarships.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Texas to Pay 10k to Every SA
- Thread starter BuffG
- Start date
Lukeasaurus
Well-Known Member
Uh .... salary cap !?
Smart move.
See ya in court.
It's coming, the question is just how fast. I hope we are planning for it, because the have's and have not's is about to become the Pacific Ocean (gl CSU).
One thing that caught my eye was this quote
One thing that caught my eye was this quote
I fundamentally believe all universities, CU included, are missing out on an opportunity to capitalize on micro-donations. Just tell me my name will appear on some random brick or plaque or whatever, buried amongst 100,000 others, and you may be shocked how many $10, $25, and $50 donations you will receive (let alone $100's or $1000's). The education system, that is supposed to be teaching us about the real world, has apparently never heard of Prefundia or other micro-donation sites.
As someone who claims to be a fan of college sports you should know this will never fly under title IX, honestly sometimes I think you are trying to sound like a moron, either that or you are just desperate for something to say.
While in principle I agree, historically only aTm has done this with any success.
Oh I fully understand that my comment would never fly in the real world
I get the point - we even tried it before with the brick thing. However, the price points were not trivial - IIRC it was $250 to just get started and that was 5-10 years ago.
It isn't easy, but is isn't impossible, to get people mobilized around a concept and drop "pocket change" to a cause. The fact that we, and most universities, have never seriously mobilized around this is disappointing, IMO.
Can we attempt not to grossly misrepresent the article?
Quoted from the link:
"The University of Texas could spend nearly $6 million a year to comply with a string of recent legal rulings requiring colleges to be more generous to their scholarship athletes."
They are purely projecting and discussing what their incurred cost could be under new rules not saying they are going to pay their student athletes 10k a year. Further down they discuss that it would be 5k in newly covered college expenses and about 5k in the form of fees for using the players images. The latter under recent rulings maybe all new money to some schools who'll be able to more aggressively market their players. You also have the NCAA likeness case in play as well which could wind-up paying the players directly.
Basically the article says, ****s changing, we thing **** will cost us 10k per player, we should be prepared.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
So Texas pays $10,000 -- soon Texas A&M will pay $15,000. Alabama will pay $20,000.....
The chasm between the "haves" and the "have nots" will be enormous.
The chasm between the "haves" and the "have nots" will be enormous.
With the rise of digital media and the easy of communication today things should only get easier on this front.
read the article counselor.
so why say it then? just for the sake of talking?
No, it's just my opinion on the pay for play thing while fully understanding that it would not work in the real world. It would suck to be a athlete outside of those sports, but football and men's basketball athletes are the ones supporting a large part of the AD financially.
Do sports only exist to entertain? I get that most sports exist on the back of one or two others, financially speaking, but we should value our student athletes similarly, in my opinion.
except for that part about the federal government disagreeing with you
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
That's fine. If everyone had the same opinion would it still be an opinion?
The one thing that could change all of this would be aa ruling from the IRS finding that any SA accepting remuneration beyond the value of ascholarship that covers necessary and proper expenses becomes an employee and therefore the entire value of said scholarship plus any stipend or other compensation is taxable, thereby eliminating any potential financial gains. All it would take would be some members of congress sympathetic to the plight of the non P5 schools.
What I want is a cap on total Student Athlete remuneration, that includes tuition, room and board, etc... at the current rate that university publishes for all students. It would give state schools a level playing field, dollars wise, recruiting against private schools giving away up to 10x the value of tuition as the publics. It would also give incentive for kids to stay in-state, which I acknowledge would be a knife that cuts both ways.
GoBuffs08
Well-Known Member
Are they mandating that the scholarship cover the full 4 years, and are they still caring about graduation rates? If not, I fully expect schools, coaching staffs and athletic departments to start paying more attention to the ROI on each athlete with marginal talent or trying to come back from injury and deciding if they should just be cut from the team to free up a scholarship for someone else.
BuffG
Well-Known Member
Can we attempt to not be an inaccurate pedant?
From the article, "Assuming the new policies survive the legal appeals process, Patterson said UT won’t have problems paying the extra $6 million to its players."
The article explicitly states that UT is prepared & will pay all of their SAs 10k each unless the new policies are overturned. Not sure how you think it says they won't be paying their SAs when that's the subject of the article. Maybe I could've added "Under new policies" to the headline, but that's a really long headline that only appeases the pedantic crowd.
So, the Whorns are asking their football and basketball players to take a pay cut? Whoa! I dunno.......
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
I disagree
The scholarship to the cross country or women's soccer or even volley ball is not worth tax dollars to me. If the school can pull it off without subsidies, then cool. But until then their should on be additional stipends for football and skiing. If any of my kids show any talent in swimming I am willing to expand the stipend to that sport as well.
The scholarship to the cross country or women's soccer or even volley ball is not worth tax dollars to me. If the school can pull it off without subsidies, then cool. But until then their should on be additional stipends for football and skiing. If any of my kids show any talent in swimming I am willing to expand the stipend to that sport as well.