texas will pay players 10,000 each when allowed
- Thread starter cyclones12321
- Start date
You won't be competing on the field with them - Rice, Houston, UCF, etc - thus, you'll be little more than a road bump, never competitive in any sport. That's the issue. Clones and Cats will be cannon fodder for OU and UT. That is not the case today. This stipend thing is a slippery slop indeed.
Last edited:
Actually my point was just the opposite - we're already at a huge disadvantage and that isn't going away. But if stipends are capped at a level that smaller P5 schools can afford, like $5k, then they'll be able to get better recruiting classes as more kids come here for the stipend rather than go be a star for a bigger non-P5 school in their area. It would help immensely with depth and would greatly improve teams like ours overall.
This whole thing just makes me so angry. Athletes get so much free stuff on top of their scholarships. At the same time, you can have a kid majoring in pre-med and a maybe benefit society someday have to pay out the a** to get a degree and be in a massive amount of debt once graduated. But because these people bring in money through athletics they should get paid. Don't schools get more funding for doing well academically? The only way I'm ok with this is under certain circumstances.
1. Every school has the same exact maximum amount that they can pay a player.
2. They only get paid if they graduate.
3. If they forgo and leave early, they should have to pay back the school.
4. They do not get large sums for payment, spread the payment throughout the year so they don't get a bulk of cash to start the school year.
5. Reward the being student side more than athlete side. If you have an awesome athlete who doesn't go to class and just gets by, he shouldn't be paid more than an athlete that works hard in the classroom as well as on the field.
So by number 5, Melvin Ejim would receive the maximum amount a school can pay an athlete.
1. Every school has the same exact maximum amount that they can pay a player.
2. They only get paid if they graduate.
3. If they forgo and leave early, they should have to pay back the school.
4. They do not get large sums for payment, spread the payment throughout the year so they don't get a bulk of cash to start the school year.
5. Reward the being student side more than athlete side. If you have an awesome athlete who doesn't go to class and just gets by, he shouldn't be paid more than an athlete that works hard in the classroom as well as on the field.
So by number 5, Melvin Ejim would receive the maximum amount a school can pay an athlete.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,750
- 33,772
- 113
This. Unless the stipend is accompanied by an increase to the scholarship limit, Iowa State's overall talent (in football) should increase.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,750
- 33,772
- 113
I guess my concern is how does this solve the current problem of money being passed under the table? I think it was said before, but just because a "student" athlete receives a stipend doesn't mean that they won't be receiving additional funds from universities, boosters, etc. It seems like this is a coverup saying "look we solved our problem of paying amateur athletes" while handing them an undocumented bag of cash.
It doesn't solve all the problems, but it does help to solve a glaring issue that causes some student athletes to live in NCAA enforced poverty. Which has the secondary impact of making bagmen less attractive. It won't solve everything, but it would be a huge positive.
So since I don't have a say in any of this and it won't end up the way I like it, what happens when schools get in trouble? Like with recruiting violations and whatever else gets schools in trouble, will the NCAA prohibit payment to players for schools on probation?
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,750
- 33,772
- 113
You're looking at it wrong. Pay for play is not intended to solve the problem of players getting paid by boosters. That's not why it's being talked about. It's coming about because schools can see the writing on the wall in regards to legal cases. Their model is probably going to be found to be illegal in the next few years, or at least big parts of it are. They're preparing for that.
It's the same reason the NFL changed the way they enforced hits to the head a few years ago. It was mainly for show in their court case. Any reduction in the number of concussions was just gravy. It was a CYA move.
Last edited:
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,750
- 33,772
- 113
who knows? In 10 years, the world of college sports could look a whole lot different than it does now.
Chump change good advertising to only be on the hook for 700k in fb and 120k in bb.
It will be a major adjustment for 90% of schools to pay the staff what they do and then the players around the above amount or maybe double.
They can handle that. But if players get their market value the system will crash and burn. If that happens it means Texas pays the team collectively 20-30 mil a season (still less than some pro athletes alone make the horns could easily afford it) and teams like ISU are forced to spend 5-10 just to try to keep up. If things get to this college sports will disappear and you'll have 2 extremes a mini xfl and then people going to watch intramural or club kids play and the sport regrowing at a grass roots level.
It will be a major adjustment for 90% of schools to pay the staff what they do and then the players around the above amount or maybe double.
They can handle that. But if players get their market value the system will crash and burn. If that happens it means Texas pays the team collectively 20-30 mil a season (still less than some pro athletes alone make the horns could easily afford it) and teams like ISU are forced to spend 5-10 just to try to keep up. If things get to this college sports will disappear and you'll have 2 extremes a mini xfl and then people going to watch intramural or club kids play and the sport regrowing at a grass roots level.
Only through larger enrollment. If you're lumping in research money with academic, having good undergraduate students or programs aren't the reason for grants being awarded (if anything, undergrad students and non-tenue track lecturers or researchers are hired after a grant is awarded). Grad students do play a big role in bringing in research money and, depending on the program, are usually given some stipend.
If athletic scholarships and stipends are even across the major conferences and can be fully funded through athletic departments alone, that's fine with me. But like other posters, I have doubts that ISU can keep with "large" (I don't know what the threshold is) stipends that other schools in the Big 12 and other major conferences can afford.
Hence the donation increases for basketball next year as well as the $750 for end zone club seating.
The 2014 fiscal year actual scholarship expenditure was $5.6 million. The financial statements for 2014 are from the Iowa Board of Regent's October 22-23 meeting. Since tuition has been stable for two years and potentially another year, the scholarship cost should remain under $6 million for 2015 and 2016.
