PDA

View Full Version : Big Ten considers pay proposal



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

4four4
05-19-2011, 06:47 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6564134

This would change college hockey over night.

joecct
05-19-2011, 07:27 PM
25 players x $2,000 = $50,000 x 2 teams = $100,000 for the low end. $250K at the high end. Manageable for the BCS and FBS schools, but at the lower revenue schools, a nice hit on the budget (or student athletic fees).

Dirty
05-19-2011, 07:56 PM
Nice how it's Ohio State who seems to be leading the charge. Instead of trying to find out and eliminate the cause for cheating, they just want to make it legal to cheat.

joecct
05-19-2011, 08:02 PM
but the BCS schools can affford that kind of layout. The remainng FBS and FCS schools, not so much. The playups, probably not. It's just a case of the rich wanting to get richer.

Pretty soon we're going to see most, if not all, of the Div 1 championships belonging to the BCS schools (maybe they do now, but I've never checked).

Greed is good. Money is good. Lack of money is bad.

giwan
05-19-2011, 08:22 PM
This will not stop cheating or paying of athletes. There will always be $100 plus dollar handshakes and more. Truly an ugly step in college sports if it comes to pass.

Patman
05-19-2011, 08:43 PM
but the BCS schools can affford that kind of layout. The remainng FBS and FCS schools, not so much. The playups, probably not. It's just a case of the rich wanting to get richer.

Pretty soon we're going to see most, if not all, of the Div 1 championships belonging to the BCS schools (maybe they do now, but I've never checked).

Greed is good. Money is good. Lack of money is bad.

Basically the bigger schools want to start the arms race because they have all the arms... this will break college athletics as we know it... nevermind college hockey... the bigger problem is that college hockey has too few teams so if it did tear apart the big schools from the small then there won't be enough schools to make the sport be worth much.

bigmrg74
05-19-2011, 08:47 PM
This will not stop cheating or paying of athletes. There will always be $100 plus dollar handshakes and more. Truly an ugly step in college sports if it comes to pass.

Yep, i doubt that it would ever pass, only about 20 schools athletic departments are in the black. This would just place a bigger burden on the have nots.

Osorojo
05-19-2011, 08:53 PM
Explain once more why DI and major junior hockey should not merge? It looks like they will soon be playing by the same off-ice rules. Their priorities are pretty much the same. Rosters will be stabilized and profits will soar, while players will not be distracted by trivial academic issues.
I won't say "I told you so." Not yet, but the day isn't far off.

joecct
05-19-2011, 09:31 PM
Maybe we should start College Hockey, Ink???

Patman
05-19-2011, 10:00 PM
Explain once more why DI and major junior hockey should not merge? It looks like they will soon be playing by the same off-ice rules. Their priorities are pretty much the same. Rosters will be stabilized and profits will soar, while players will not be distracted by trivial academic issues.
I won't say "I told you so." Not yet, but the day isn't far off.

Because we don't want it to and because it won't work... once you substitute market economics for the small locations they'll fold up like a cheap tent and make a beeline for the bigger cities. People will NOT associate their school with a glorified minor league hockey team who does not attend classes.

What you will have to show is that they'll stay to these small cities and towns, won't move to greener pastures, and why fans and alumni will associate your clown league with their college.

edit: I would have NO interest in supporting my school under this framework and were THEY to agree with this i would dissociate myself from them due to their massive case lack of judgement. I doubt I'll be the only one.

CHFAN222
05-19-2011, 10:40 PM
Holy overreaction Batman.

As far as this proposal goes this is in a major way a good thing. These big power schools are making money hand over fist on these athletes in basketball and football. Due to NCAA rules they are restricted in taking jobs that can only earn them up to 2K during the school year. This ruling will at least give the athletes somewhat more of a cut of the money they are making for their schools.

As far as only the Big 10 getting everyone now I wouldn't quite go that far. There are a lot of decisions that factor into what school an athlete chooses. Academic reputation, what programs the school offers in his/her major, facilities, location,..etc. When it comes right down to it this is just a small amount of money and while having some impact won't be the end all factor.

Happy
05-19-2011, 10:46 PM
Explain once more why DI and major junior hockey should not merge? It looks like they will soon be playing by the same off-ice rules. Their priorities are pretty much the same. Rosters will be stabilized and profits will soar, while players will not be distracted by trivial academic issues.
I won't say "I told you so." Not yet, but the day isn't far off.

You really are a dumbass.

mookie1995
05-20-2011, 10:01 AM
D1 is older than MJ


Explain once more why DI and major junior hockey should not merge? It looks like they will soon be playing by the same off-ice rules. Their priorities are pretty much the same. Rosters will be stabilized and profits will soar, while players will not be distracted by trivial academic issues.
I won't say "I told you so." Not yet, but the day isn't far off.

FreshFish
05-20-2011, 10:15 AM
Where's the news here? This kind of practice has been going on for decades and it is perfectly legal; with a twist...they actually have to [pretend to] do some work in exchange for their pay.

Non-scholarship schools have jobs available for their athletes to supplement the maintenance department....dorm crew, grounds crew, etc. You get a job that requires twenty minutes of work each day (that you actually have to do) and get paid for two hours of work each day.

I cleaned up the party room on Saturday and Sunday morning. It was distasteful work, it usually took around 45 minutes each morning, and I was paid for 4 hours of work (to compensate for the disgusting nature of the cleaning involved).

The only difference in this proposal is to sever the link between the work and the pay.

MinnesotaNorthStar
05-20-2011, 10:32 AM
Holy overreaction Batman.

As far as this proposal goes this is in a major way a good thing. These big power schools are making money hand over fist on these athletes in basketball and football. Due to NCAA rules they are restricted in taking jobs that can only earn them up to 2K during the school year. This ruling will at least give the athletes somewhat more of a cut of the money they are making for their schools.
So your argument is they can't work as much as other students? Of course other students are, you know, PAYING TO GO TO SCHOOL.

The benefit most of these student-athletes get for making the schools money is a free education. They want extra spending money? Take out a loan and go into debt like the rest of us.

Osorojo
05-20-2011, 11:25 AM
It's not "my" league or my idea. I detest the idea of semipro [or pro] college hockey, bit ignoring reality won't make it go away. College sports are going pro, hockey is a college sport, and sticking your head in the sand or slandering the bearers of bad news won't improve the situation a stinking bit. Read the article!

SCSU Euro
05-20-2011, 11:45 AM
It's not "my" league or my idea. I detest the idea of semipro [or pro] college hockey, bit ignoring reality won't make it go away.

Will ignoring you? Sorry, you teed yourself up there, and if I didn't do it first, someone else would have.

JF_Gophers
05-20-2011, 12:09 PM
On the surface I agree that athletes should get some pay if they are in revenue sports (Football, Basketball). If the NCAA makes money off of you, you should be getting a cost of living payment. Nothing spectacular, but something.

The Big Ten isn't asking for athletes to be paid by all schools in all sports. They just want their schools to pay athletes. This would only affect recruiting, not the ability of small schools to field teams. As it would not change their budget at all if they chose not to pass a similar bylaw.

Also the teams still have a limit on how many can be on each team. So its not like the talent pool will be empty for non-paying schools. It will be the borderline kids who say "I can be the #1 guy at small_school_08 for free or I can be bench boy at Big_Ten_02 for $5000 a year."

CHFAN222
05-20-2011, 01:36 PM
So your argument is they can't work as much as other students? Of course other students are, you know, PAYING TO GO TO SCHOOL.

The benefit most of these student-athletes get for making the schools money is a free education. They want extra spending money? Take out a loan and go into debt like the rest of us.

If you're in a big time sports school in a revenue producing sport the school is making a ton of money off of you. Packing in 80K+ for a football game, another 10K+ for a bball game, sponsorship deals, and all that TV revenue tends to do that. It seems vastly unfair that all this revenue is being generated from these young men and they aren't even allowed to take a normal paying job to help pay for groceries, going to the movie theatre on a date, or have the money to fly home in case of a family emergency.

4four4
05-20-2011, 01:59 PM
I have heard the Big Ten and other major conferences are talking about leaving the NCAA to start up their own "NCAA". This might be the first step towards that idea.