Why Not Allow Boosters?

[AlferdJasper]

Because CU would suck at it.

Yep.

And as far as it "going on already" ... I was at a well-known restaurant in Denver when a CU player and his family were there. The owner tried to give the kid a free cupcake after their meal --- and the player said "sorry, it would be a violation." Make of it what you will, but some kids just don't take chances with the rules. Maybe it's going on a lot of places, but after the deli-meat-walk-ons scandal, our players seem to have been drilled not to take anything from a booster.

 

[Goose]

Opening the door to the highest bidder without restriction would kill college sports as we know them. How many schools could truly compete under those conditions, 10, 15, maybe 20. For everyone else the game would be over. Go to a lower level (where the highest dollar also runs the show,) eliminate most of athletics all together.

People keep saying this, and no one can prove it. We already have players going to the highest bidder - this is undeniable. Hwo do you know that it would limit the number of schools that could compete in this situation?

 

[dply]

People keep saying this, and no one can prove it. We already have players going to the highest bidder - this is undeniable. Hwo do you know that it would limit the number of schools that could compete in this situation?

Where is L_Buff when you need him?

 

[AlferdJasper]

We already have players going to the highest bidder - this is undeniable.

Denied.

 

[Ruckus]

What I learned in this thread: title 9 is a problem.

 

[sackman]

You know what I think would work better? A system where boosters could contribute into a pot of money at each school. The pot would be restricted to a certain amount, say, $500,000 per school. The school could use it however they wanted to. If they want to blow their budget on the #1 quarterback, fine.

 

[TDbuff]

You know what I think would work better? A system where boosters could contribute into a pot of money at each school. The pot would be restricted to a certain amount, say, $500,000 per school. The school could use it however they wanted to. If they want to blow their budget on the #1 quarterback, fine.

Would be like a salary cap, with part-owners providing the funding.

I'd just apply the baseball model across the board. Have a minor or D-League as an option(that means the NFL), but if a kid gets drafted out of high school he can take his signing bonus, and still go to college.

Booster's won't be eliminated, but the bluechips will get the options and money they deserve. And maybe if some 5 star has a $30,000 signing bonus in his bank account, he won't care that some superfan is trying to slip him lunch money, and just pick the school/program that's best for him.

I realize that would involve the NFL getting a lot more lenient with their current contract system and relationship with their players. I mean, right now they don't have to develop their talent, and they can just use it up and spit it out with little penalty. That attitude would need to change.

 

[buffgal]

A women's basketball player from 20 years ago rented a room from me during a summer that she wasn't taking classes so could not live on campus. Coach Barry called and gave me a list of rules that we had to follow and she reminded me that if we didn't follow the NCAA rules, the player could be found ineligible.

Her parents paid the rent every month. Coach agreed that it was a fair rent for a room. I sent a photocopy of the check to Coach Barry. We had to have separate sections in the refrigerator because I could not feed her. If she drank a soda that was mine, she had to replace it and she did.

I was allowed to give her a birthday cake and have some of her friends over, but Coach Barry approved it.

We did not commit any NCAA violations, but some of the rules I was given were totally ridiculous. I couldn't give her a soda or let her eat with me? No, both were against the rules.

 

[TimmyDUBs]

Sounds like the end of college bball. Why go to school if you are essentially entering the D-league?

 

[Goose]

Sounds like the end of college bball. Why go to school if you are essentially entering the D-league?

Better exposure than the DLeague. Better fall back options than the DLeague.

 

[Buffnik]

I just think, if allowed, it would become a slippery slope and essentially athletes being legitimately paid to play in an uncontrolled manner. The bidding wars for recruits would be outrageous and would dwarf even the NFL free agency, which at least has constraints by salary cap provisions. Imagine the top recruit in the country having George Solich offering an $80k Mercedes and free food for 4 years, while T Boone Pickens offering $50k/season + a $70k Range Rover and then Phil Knight (or whoever at Nike) offering $100k/season and free Nike for life.

I don't necessarily disagree that these athletes should be paid in some way or allowed to transfer at will (which is a completely separate issue unrelated to this), but to just allow booster to "give kids whatever they want", is not a precedent anyone wants to deal with, IMO.

The slippery slope to a lifetime of your skills going to the highest bidder and you having to put up with a bunch of crap from who is paying you as they act like they own you?

Isn't that pretty much everyone's work life?

Right now, we have a situation with college athletes where their value to the market may be at the highest point it will ever be in their lifetimes... and they're not allowed to accept a dime.