The money I spent on tuition on my kids would certainly have been otherwise invested and I’d have retired several years ago.
Last edited:
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!
We now take you to USC, UA, Okie Lite, Auburn, Da U, KANSAS, & NC State
- Thread starter buff4bcs1985
- Start date
Good gawd. So you’re saying getting tuition and a food and housing stipend is not akin to getting paid. I disagree.
It’s not. And I don’t know why these pro player unions are allowed to discriminate with age restrictions.
Get rid of one and done. Use the G League as a developmental league for guys who don’t want to go to college. But I’d also argue that a guy like Zion is increasing his market value by playing in college.
unless you're saying a scholarship has no value, I don't understand how you can claim it isn't compensation. your other points are valid, but hell, a college degree is worth a lot.
Sewall's remarks seem to raise the right questions here, IMO.
Charles Barkley, of all people, offered an idea that really stuck with me regarding properly compensating NCAA players. Basically the NCAA sets up a stipend, each player is eligible for that stipend upon graduation. If a player drops out, goes pro, etc. they waive their claim on that stipend. The amount of that stipend is perhaps up for debate, but I think it is a good way to encourage the whole "amateur STUDENT athlete" part of the NCAA's mission.
Of course that would also require an NCAA rule requiring that all scholarship offers are guaranteed from admission to graduation. (5 year total, 4 years of eligibility). I also think it would be wise for the NCAA to pay for that stipend, that way they could still monitor "improper benefits" and could help keep the non D1 programs alive.
Of course that would also require an NCAA rule requiring that all scholarship offers are guaranteed from admission to graduation. (5 year total, 4 years of eligibility). I also think it would be wise for the NCAA to pay for that stipend, that way they could still monitor "improper benefits" and could help keep the non D1 programs alive.
Yeah. The plan I've liked for a while is that they receive a profit share on certain things (like bringing back the NCAA video games from EA), but the money is put in escrow and collectible upon graduation.
I'm not following the reasoning on this point
It means that if the NCAA is benefiting from this kid's services as a freshman and sophomore, but he blows his knee out and can never play football or basketball again, he isn't told, "Sorry, kid, we need this scholarship for someone else" and left hanging.
I could see a world where a player isn't producing at a high enough level and are dropped from scholarship after year 3. In that scenario the athlete must either find another program to pay for their final year of school in order to graduate, pay for their final year of school out of pocket in order to graduate, or fail to graduate and forfeit their stipend.
you both are enumerating cases where a player may not finish playing 4 years for the same school. there's a few cases to consider:
- Shldr's where the player loses productivity
- Alfred's where the student gets injured, hardship, etc..
- one in which the student voluntary transfers
- one in which the student violates school policy and gets kicked off the team
options besides guaranteed 4/5 year scholarships:
- player forfeits stipend
- player gets whatever stipend has accumulated up to the point of their departure from the team
- stipend gets held in a "trust" until he/she eventually graduates, if ever
If a student loses their scholarship to a non-academic or behavioral issues ( injury or performance) the onus is on them to pay for school and all of their associated costs. There may not be a way for a student to pay for and finish school, so they would forfeit the stipend because they are poor. So once again it would be the system working against them.
good point about the system working against them. Guaranteed Student Loans would be an option open for most though, at least, I think -- I haven't kept up, but assume they're still a thing (low rates locked to prime, no payments while still in school).
So why exactly are you against guaranteed scholarships?
Damn, gotta give him credit for balls. He'll go to the jailhouse still kicking and screaming.
In general, I'm not. I just wasn't following the reasoning that stipends necessitated guaranteed scholarships. To be clear, I'm still not following that logic.
That being said, if universities decided to go down the road of guaranteed scholarships, I do think there should be clauses exempting for violation of team rules, unacceptable academic performance and the like. I think in the case of injuries, this is a tough situation. schools are limited on the number of scholarships by the NCAA and if a player gets injured during their Freshman year, it could be a real impediment to the team to lose that scholarship for the next three; of course I have empathy for the student in this situation as well, but again, GSLs are an option that most students manage to deal with.
IMO, the only real tough case to deal with is when a player is healthy, but not performing at the level of other players to which the coach might otherwise give a scholarship.
WarBuff
Club Member
Don't think the kicking and screaming will stop once he gets there.
I would be all in favor of exemptions as you have listed. I don't think it would be at all difficult to say a university must guarantee the full scholarship as long as the athlete maintains good academic standing, and does violate any team or university rules.
In the case of injuries, have the kid medically retire. They are still on scholarship, but the scholarship is then freed up to be used later.
For the last case, I say tough. That is a situation that isn't necessarily the kids fault. If he got recruited, and just turns out to not be very good, then that is just bad luck.
If you think there is graft and corruption now, wait until we institute payments to players. And if you allow players to earn money on their likeness it’s all over. You will see 8 to 10 schools dominate recruiting. How do you think Oregon would recruit with their Nike ties? They’d own the Pac.
How different is that from the current recruiting landscape?
Allowing a player to earn money off their likeness may actually be my favored solution (other than eliminating the one and done). It lets the market, and to some degree the player, dictate how much a player makes (eliminating question of how to allocate payments to someone like Zion vs someone like Kin, for example) and takes the onus off the ADs to pay the players directly. Obviously some limits may need to be placed, but I have a hard time arguing against a kid making money off their own likeness.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news...graduation-rates-black-white-football-players
The researchers found that when comparing federal gradation rates of only full-time students, the graduation gap for black football players in the Power Five conferences was nearly five times larger than that of white players. White football players graduated at a rate five percentage points lower than other full-time students. Black players graduated at a rate 25.2 percentage points lower than other full-time black male students.
Does this account for the number of players that decide to go pro versus completing their degree?