Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

This is a topic I've always wondered about, and an ESPN article went up Wednesday by Rod Gilmore. He's a horrible announcer, but he makes a decent argument.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/s ... id=2733624


He advocates setting up some sort of trust for players that they can access after they graduate. There would be a certain NFL salary line that if players exceed that line, they will then be ineligible for their trust.

This will never happen, because those in charge never learned to share in kindergarten, but do you think it "should" happen, in one form or another?

As long as the 4th string QB for BG made the same amount as the starter fro the championship team....I would be all for it.

amen. if it were a universal fund then ok, but if it came out of the college's pocket then mid majors would have an even harder time getting good recruits. since most of the country doesnt give a damn about mid majors i could see how this idea would end up terrible unfair if it was adopted. arguements such as "they play harder football against better players they deserve more money" or some crap like that would cause problems

If they get paid to play, then make them pay for their tuition, room and board, and books.

Falconian wrote:If they get paid to play, then make them pay for their tuition, room and board, and books.

I didn't think it was possible for somebody to miss the point that completely.

You've been posting here for how long?

Amateur athletics, money, and honesty make terrible bedfellows.

I have always wondered, shock horror, whether the NFL would ever sanction its members to endow their own schools, start tapping into talent at about little league age onwards, raising their starlets from cradle to grave so to speak, and trading/selling/loaning/firing the rest. At least "the rest" would have had their education paid for, and pay to boot in some cases.

I'm not a fan, but its not by any means unknown in European pro soccer, where the richest teams have cradle to grave schooling built around elite coaching /training with facilities to leave you drooling.

Even if teams only scoop one or two players from their academies every couple of years, the savings in terms of externally outsourcing stars pays for itself. I imagine it would leave the BCS speechless for a minute.

The problem with trying to pay athletes is title IX. If you pay the men, you have to pay the ladies equally. Good luck trying to delineate the process using specific sports or revnue generation as a basis, to myu knowledge no one has ever successfully challeneged Title IX based on revenue.

Zom -- the amatuer thing wouldn't apply in this case, unless you surmise said set-up is some sort of slippery slope situation. Alliteration aside, that's a distinct possibility.

This suggestion entails a trust being set-up that players would not be able to access until after they have graduated. That would even give a nice little incentive for the players not bound for pro football to go to class and graduate.

And for whoever asked -- yeah it would have to be even-steven across the board, or no go.

Like Flipper said, won't happen because of Title IX. If it did happen, it wouldn't be in the way we'd want it to. It would just further drive non-BCS teams farther down.

You're probably right. I hadn't thought of the title IX concerns.

Besides Title IX, every athlete will be coming forward with their hands extended. That means the gymnasts, cross country runners, golfers, etc. all in sports that generate little or no money, will be wanting to get paid.

Also, you need to make money to share the wealth. How much profit has BG (60 percent of the other DI School made in the last 10 years)? $0. Even those like OSU and Michigan make very little pure profit. They have larger athletic programs to fund along with higher coaches salaries (some assistant's make more than the head coaches at BG in football, basketball, and hockey). This mind you is after all money from NCAA, MAC, and BCS TV Contract money is handed out.

Its a lot more complicated than the average person realizes, it is more than football and basketball.

We could debate this ad nauseum and their would still not be a right answer. Just plenty of misguided answers and ideas.

YES
The amature in College Athletics died long ago. Those who play football at this level deserve cash for performance, beyond tuition. Schools Deserve players that will honor contracts and stay 4 years or repay all pay earned.
The NCAA should have no jurisdiction over college Football and an independent commissioner should be appointed, by an independent search firm, to oversee all dealings and the implementation of an inclusive playoff system.

fine... I'll bite... no more athletic scholarships... and you can pay the players... but you still have to pay for school.

MACMAN wrote:YES
The amature in College Athletics died long ago.

This is so far off its not funny. A large majority of the athletes in college never see a penny of scholarship money. Entire divisions, as well as leagues like the Ivy, don't have athletic scholarships and a lot of sports, like tennis, track and other major sports, receive two or three schollies to divy up so a minor sport like football, played almost nowhere outside this country, can eat up huge amounts of the available athletic resources. Believe me, most athletes in college walk on and play for the love of their sport, be it skiing, rodeo, curling or soccer.