Crimson Red Sports

How do you feel about the paying of athletes?  Also, what should happen to boosters, who think they are helping, go behind the coaches backs and pay players?

1.  I am all for paying players a stipend.
2. The boosters should be banned from ticket privileges and disassociated from the University.

Simply put, this^^, although some lesser programs may have difficulty paying the players.

I don't know about paying the players per se.  :-\

which players will we pay ? all of them ? just the starters ? or will it include players of every sport or just the big money sports like football or basketball ?  

or say like ... I got a scholarship ... lets say for say baseball
but in high school I was at best a "C" student and not really brainy with
school work
and I make mention of my lack of the smarts to make the Deans List to the recruiter
so the College Coach offers to give me a helper or aka a test taker/tutor
 
that is a very valuable  commodity  to some people and worth a lot  ...
would that be considered "pay" too ?  

as for the boosters ... they need to be kicked out of all things BAMA

1.  I'm not for paying football players.  It'd rapidly grow into 'pay for all athletes' (women too), at every school.  Top athletes would want more than benched players.  How would a school afford it?  

But if approved, Alabama will be one of the schools that would benefit most.  One of the proposals is to allow a school to pay what it can.  Alabama has the revenue to pay players more than most schools.  We'd be first in recruiting every year (harumph).

2.  Boosters who get out of control should be forced to watch games with Harvey Updyke.  :lol2:

I don't know the time demands that are put on athletes in all the sports that offer schollys, but the time that training/practicing etc. requires makes is real tough for these students to have jobs while in school.  So I've long thought that some stipend to mitigate the restrictions of these time demands is fair.  An idea who's time has come.

Oh my God !  start digging the "over signers.com" graves now ...
this would kill them instantly !!!!!

 :lol: :lol: :lol:

:lol:  Pretty funny, X.

A couple of years ago I was contacted by a member of the NCAA Presidential Task Force on Athletics.  We discussed the problems that big money has brought colleges, and we discussed potential solutions.  One of the proposals was to return to the original intent of TV revenues.  If you recall, Chevrolet was the original sponsor for many of the top TV games.  They gave scholarships to each school.  But soon the schools wanted cash instead.  The proposal was to return to scholarship funds instead of cash.  CNS won't like it, but such a policy would dry up the free flow of cash immediately.  It would also benefit education.  Gosh, money for education.  Never catch on!

You get the idea.  More in another thread (and an earlier hour)...

^THIS^   But also --  many of these kids have few family resources, so they have to rely upon the generosity of other players to do something simple, like go out for pizza.  And a stipend might actually eliminate some of the "illegal booster activity."

As for big schools v. smaller schools, it is looking more and more like another tier could be created (Division IV?, Division X?) for the larger universities tired of the mid-major's undue influence in their athletic activities.

As for the amount of the stipend, it seems the discussions mostly agree it should be a set amount for all universities, and the same for all players, so as to eliminate the appearance of compensation and eliminate that type of competition.  Hence, a "stipend," not "compensation."

And Saban is in favor of a stipend.  That's enough for me.

I don't feel they need to get payed as amateur athletes. They're already on a free-ride scholly, which is costly/expensive enough. And we all know about the "Booster Society" @ AU. I'm purty sure CNS and the faculty has made that clear since we haven't had that problem in awhile...JM 2cents worth.

Stop with the griping about money for players.  Football players DO GET STIPENDS for expenses not covered by their full tuition scholarship, books, full meal ticket, guest tickets, and full housing allowances.  It's a substantial amount of money for many players.  See: http://www.holyturf.com/2011/05/football-players-receive-17000-annually-in-cash-all-within-ncaa-rules/  In addition, since 2011 the NCAA allows universities to pay a $2,000 stipend per full-scholarship athlete.
If you want to feel sorry for underpaid players  :facepalm: , spend your tears on those students on half scholarships or less.  Check baseball, for instance.  Most football players at big schools are treated (and paid) like kings, by comparison.

Boosters should be held liable for bribery and tried in a coutroom when caught. This I think should be a state law and not an NCAA rule. If and when they put a minimum of 5 years in jail if caught and prosecuted, this type of thing will continue on.

These poor football players are living at school year round anymore, with education, rent and food free. They have some perks and seem to be doing well if they can afford the many tatoos from head to toe, wearing nice brand name clothing, shoes, and jewelry. Some even drive pretty nice autos. If they are so poor and deprived, I would think this would be a driving point to excel at the sport to make it to the next level where there are millions of dollars awaiting them.
 

Just pay them enough to afford some Skittles.  :lol2:

J, didn't the State of Alabama pass a law similar to what you're talking about? Seems like I remember something to that effect happening after the Albert Means debacle.

Im not for paying players, like many said it would get out of control fast.

The 300$ for all athletes on scholorship is an idea, but that means your paying the same to the water polo players. And does anyone really think that will stop a star Football player from taking that 180k that someone offers him? Just sayn.

I think this whole thing of paying players is Coaches feeling guilty that they make millions, and whose fault is that, the schools that pay them that much thats who.(Albabama included).

I think the money should go back to the fans, ticket prices should go down, ect...

one good idea is to set up a fund for the players that they can have after their time at the University is done.

Yes I think so, but all states should follow suit.

Outstanding points by the Cat & Jamos, especially the link from Chechem. To further enhance the point, The University of Alabama even posts the estimated costs by semester  at $12,030 (see link) for an in-state student. The link provided by Chechem is incredible and stunning and should end any debate about paying players. We tend to forget about all the students who attend college and work 2 or 3 part-time jobs, or work full-time and attend part-time while paying tuition. I won't mention that I paid for my tuition by serving 7 years in the Army. Finally, we can thank the Alabama taxpayers who provide the funds to our colleges.




http://www.ua.edu/quickfacts/cost.html



 :dog:
 
 

Thanks, MD.
I went to school thanks to loans, grants, work-study, and on-campus jobs.  My family had NO MONEY.  I know what it's like to do without meals and live in a dorm without a.c. (Abercrombie).  These athletes are whiners. 

You couldn't have said it any better Chech. :clap:

I believe the players should just be happy to have gotten a
scholarship and be able play for their University ...
be it at Alabama or some Ploy-Tech crap hole in Moose Jaw Saskatchewan .

putting a kid through college these days is hard and a lot of people can't
afford to do it ... so if a kid gets to go for free because they play a game ?
no brainier in my book ... 
deal with it kiddo's , life's a beach   :lol2:

 

First, thanks for all opinions/answers.  There were many good points made.

I have no problem with players getting a stipend.  Some of players come to college with basically what they have on their back.  They can't hold a job because of the hours of practice, meetings, class, and study hall. Some of the students that people have mentioned are in the same situation, they come to school with very little, however they have the opportunity to get a job.  These players are also helping make money for the university.   I wonder what has happened to the enrollment figures since the success of Bama's sports teams?

As far as boosters, I know they just want to help, but they are a huge problem.  There are ways to help without hurting the program.  I also, think they should be banned from the program if they are the reason for an NCAA violation.

Coach, let me be clear:

The NCAA allows players who fit this description to receive a stipend of $2000, plus a Pell Grant ($5500), plus an allowance of $500 for clothes, and more for occasional meals.  That's the current rule.  Nobody is going hungry or naked as a football player.

Dr. Whitt became President of UA several years ago with a goal of increasing enrollment to 38,000. Enrollment at that time was about 22,000. He is now the chancellor of the University of Alabama System. He recently gave CNS and the success of the football program much of the credit for the growth of enrollment to around 34,000 this year.

Times are good in Tuscaloosa.

Is there a link?

Yes. Look under some of Chechem's posts or my post a few above yours where I was responding to Chechem. It's incredible.


 :D

Thanks, MD.  Yes, the link is above.
That article is from 2011 (I think).  Since then the NCAA approved a $2000 stipend for all scholarship athletes, which can be provided even if they have a full scholarship and a Pell Grant.  I know, makes this whole discussion moot, huh?

i also am against paying players because in my Humble Opinion the money would begin to be cheating money. We don't our young athletes to look forward to money. If they want to go out let them ask CNS for a dollar. I know it seems hard guys but there is so much of the NFL and the money, what would it be like if they were getting payed at this level? RTR!