CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Division 4 would Cost $$$

by Mars · 7/25/2013

Advertisement
M
Mars


Say that your favorite college football program had to pay nearly half a million dollars extra each year to continue playing at the highest level. Do you think that they would do it, Yes, or No?





As a source, Steve Spurrier was the SEC rep this year pushing "$3600-3900" annual stipends per player ( http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2013/07/16/steve-spurrier-opines-on-irish-stipends-/2523587/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ). Last year he did the same, giving "$3500-4000" as his number then. Or around $300 per player per game. $4000 times a roster of 105 would be $420,000.00. Of course, only 85 players are actually on scholarship currently ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recruiting_(college_athletics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;) ). The number that the NCAA was considering was $2000 per player per year. 85 x $2000 is $170,000, a smaller number, sure, but not exactly a small one. Manageable for UNLV and Nevada? Probably. Arkansas State and Idaho? Maybe not so much. By comparison, Notre Dame claims that they already spend $52,000 on each football player each season (scholarship/equipment/supplies). But this isn't including the additional possible changes for basketball and other sports as well.





This link gives a lot more info about large school budgets and football income (for example, in 2011 schools from the ACC, Big XII, BigTen, PAC-12, and SEC on average made $80.4 Million per year and spent $74.6 Million):

http://espn.go.com/chicago/college-football/story/_/id/8818929/alabama-crimson-tide-notre-dame-fighting-irish-coaches-support-stipends-college-athletes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Of course, that link also mentions that the average worker with a high school degree makes 1.3 Million dollars over his lifetime, while the average worker with a college Bachelor's degree makes $2.3 Million.....
Q
Qman
4K a year is a pittance to what the players are worth.
S
snoscythe
Not to mention that you're also going to be adding all the costs associated with employing about 100 more people (don't forget you are going to be paying redshirt and some scout team players as well as your rostered players). The government is going to ask for their piece of the pie as well when players are getting more than scholarships.
M
Mars
Qman wrote:
4K a year is a pittance to what the players are worth.

How much is the average college football player worth at, say, Colorado? Does player #85 add any value at all to his school? In athletic departments that are losing money, should the players be paying the school since they appear to bring in negative value?
M
Mars
snoscythe wrote:
Not to mention that you're also going to be adding all the costs associated with employing about 100 more people.

The government is going to ask for their piece of the pie as well when players are getting more than scholarships.

Why would BYU hire 100 people to pay the same players the same scholarships, except that they would be worth slightly more money than they currently are?



And what/how would the government take from the school due to that?
Advertisement
G
Guest
The day that college football players get paid will be a very sad day for me.
S
SpiffCoug
What if they treated this new upper division of football similar to a semi-pro league?



BYU paid an entry fee for their men's soccer team to play in the PDL. As long as the players are in good standing with the school they can compete. Now, the PDL is considered an under-21 or -23 league (can't remember which) and each team is allowed X amount of roster spots that can be manned by players older than the cut-off age.



What if the SEC, B1G, Big XII, ACC, etc did something similar. They paid players a stipend - in addition to the scholarship - and the schools paid an entry fee to participate. They could say, on the 105-man roster, only 15 can be older than 22.
M
Mars
hawkwing wrote:
The day that college football players get paid will be a very sad day for me.

Why, when football players already get paid? They get their scholarship paid for. They get books paid for. They get food paid for. They get housing paid for. They already get paid. And I agree, they don't get paid enough.



In the new system, Bronco would make more than 5 times as much (according to rumor) as his 85 players combined. And that still seems an unfairly high price to pay the players?
G
Guest
Mars wrote:
The day that college football players get paid will be a very sad day for me.

Why, when football players already get paid? They get their scholarship paid for. They get books paid for. They get food paid for. They get housing paid for. They already get paid. And I agree, they don't get paid enough.



In the new system, Bronco would make more than 5 times as much (according to rumor) as his 85 players combined. And that still seems an unfairly high price to pay the players?


It's the beginning of the end of sports at BYU and traditional college football in general. The traditionalist in my hates to see the system I've grown up with come to an end.
M
Mars
hawkwing wrote:
It's the beginning of the end of sports at BYU and traditional college football in general. The traditionalist in my hates to see the system I've grown up with come to an end.
That's a fair and valid point. And it depends on the extent and the implementation.



A $4000 stipend would hardly end the college football system, IMO. It might reduce the number of participating teams from 130 down to about 90, but that would be a good thing, not a bad thing in my opinion. Texas State and Western Kentucky are hurting the sport, not helping it from my point of view.
Advertisement
S
scott715
Why? Those two teams are decent. Better than the UNLVs and NMSUs of the division.
M
MountainMD
Mars wrote:
It's the beginning of the end of sports at BYU and traditional college football in general. The traditionalist in my hates to see the system I've grown up with come to an end.
That's a fair and valid point. And it depends on the extent and the implementation.



A $4000 stipend would hardly end the college football system, IMO. It might reduce the number of participating teams from 130 down to about 90, but that would be a good thing, not a bad thing in my opinion. Texas State and Western Kentucky are hurting the sport, not helping it from my point of view.


How does Texas State hurt the sport? They have had a solid team at whatever levels they have played for decades.
S
scott715
Orlando Sentinal has UTSA 103 and WK 67.
M
Mars
SpiffCoug wrote:
What if they treated this new upper division of football similar to a semi-pro league? BYU paid an entry fee for their men's soccer team to play in the PDL. As long as the players are in good standing with the school they can compete. Now, the PDL is considered an under-21 or -23 league (can't remember which) and each team is allowed X amount of roster spots that can be manned by players older than the cut-off age. What if the SEC, B1G, Big XII, ACC, etc did something similar. They paid players a stipend - in addition to the scholarship - and the schools paid an entry fee to participate. They could say, on the 105-man roster, only 15 can be older than 22.
BYU's men's soccer and rugby teams aren't officially a part of the athletic department (neither is hockey). I know that the men's soccer players receive neither scholarship nor salary. BYU had to pay to join the PDL (Premier Development League) of the USL (United Soccer Leagues) and is the only University-sponsored team with membership. The PDL is an amatuer league, where no player is paid anywhere, thus keeping a player's amateur status intact. In fact, BYU players are technically eligible to play NCAA soccer for a different school at the same time as playing on the BYU-sponsored development team. The "BYU Men's Soccer Foundation" is a non-profit organization, and thus doesn't fall prey to Labor laws. The majority of players in the league are completely unpaid. Rosters are 26 players, including no more than 8 players over 23 years old, and no less than 3 players who are 18 or younger.



A full professional league, of course, would create more difficulties than it solves- Unions, Collective Bargaining Agreements, recruiting vs drafting, free agency, player agents, contracts, minimum salaries, salary caps, endorsement deals, full health benefits, retirement, sick leave, vacation days, holiday pay, etc.



On the other hand, why not just create a new football-only version of the NCAA? While the NCAA itself does already contain conferences that sponsor football-only, hockey-only, etc, the sports of boxing and rowing have their own athletic associations that are entirely separate from the NCAA. It seems that they could just create a NCFA for football and make any rules they want, similar to the National Collegiate Boxing Association.



http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/705366909/BYU-sports-budget-rundown-shows-what-sports-profit-cost.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
M
Mars
hawkwing wrote:
It's the beginning of the... end of... traditional college football... The traditionalist in my hates to see the system I've grown up with come to an end.
MountainMD wrote:
How does Texas State hurt the sport? They have had a solid team at whatever levels they have played for decades.


South Alabama

Georgia State

Western Kentucky

Massachusetts

Texas State

University of Texas- San Antonio

Appalachian State

Georgia Southern

Old Dominion

Charlotte



How many of those 10 programs are joining Division I-A in football with serious plans of winning a National Championship? How do they fit in to the traditional system of college football? Are they making the sport stronger and more competitive, or weaker and more watered-down?
Advertisement
G
Guest
Mars wrote:
It's the beginning of the... end of... traditional college football... The traditionalist in my hates to see the system I've grown up with come to an end.
MountainMD wrote:
How does Texas State hurt the sport? They have had a solid team at whatever levels they have played for decades.


South Alabama

Georgia State

Western Kentucky

Massachusetts

Texas State

University of Texas- San Antonio

Appalachian State

Georgia Southern

Old Dominion

Charlotte



How many of those 10 programs are joining Division I-A in football with serious plans of winning a National Championship? How do they fit in to the traditional system of college football? Are they making the sport stronger and more competitive, or weaker and more watered-down?


I definitely see your point and can agree with it to a large extent, but who are we to decide what teams have a chance to win a championship before any games are played? Isn't that one of the primary complaints about college football and behind the push for a playoff? And does paying players really solve the issue? Wouldn't instituting more restrictions on 1A membership maintain the integrity of the traditional college football teams without opening a whole new can of worms with countless unintended consequences?
S
SpiffCoug
Mars wrote:
What if they treated this new upper division of football similar to a semi-pro league? BYU paid an entry fee for their men's soccer team to play in the PDL. As long as the players are in good standing with the school they can compete. Now, the PDL is considered an under-21 or -23 league (can't remember which) and each team is allowed X amount of roster spots that can be manned by players older than the cut-off age. What if the SEC, B1G, Big XII, ACC, etc did something similar. They paid players a stipend - in addition to the scholarship - and the schools paid an entry fee to participate. They could say, on the 105-man roster, only 15 can be older than 22.
BYU's men's soccer and rugby teams aren't officially a part of the athletic department (neither is hockey). I know that the men's soccer players receive neither scholarship nor salary. BYU had to pay to join the PDL (Premier Development League) of the USL (United Soccer Leagues) and is the only University-sponsored team with membership. The PDL is an amatuer league, where no player is paid anywhere, thus keeping a player's amateur status intact. In fact, BYU players are technically eligible to play NCAA soccer for a different school at the same time as playing on the BYU-sponsored development team. The "BYU Men's Soccer Foundation" is a non-profit organization, and thus doesn't fall prey to Labor laws. The majority of players in the league are completely unpaid. Rosters are 26 players, including no more than 8 players over 23 years old, and no less than 3 players who are 18 or younger.



A full professional league, of course, would create more difficulties than it solves- Unions, Collective Bargaining Agreements, recruiting vs drafting, free agency, player agents, contracts, minimum salaries, salary caps, endorsement deals, full health benefits, retirement, sick leave, vacation days, holiday pay, etc.



On the other hand, why not just create a new football-only version of the NCAA? While the NCAA itself does already contain conferences that sponsor football-only, hockey-only, etc, the sports of boxing and rowing have their own athletic associations that are entirely separate from the NCAA. It seems that they could just create a NCFA for football and make any rules they want, similar to the National Collegiate Boxing Association.



http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/705366909/BYU-sports-budget-rundown-shows-what-sports-profit-cost.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I believe some of the other teams in the PDL do play their players a small amount - hence my semi-pro designation, of which I very much could be wrong.



But I do wonder if setting something up, like you said of an NCFA, where teams buy into the system, could work. Maybe limit it to 64 teams and maybe try to get the NFL to participate as well. Make it a farm league. NFL teams can team up with two NCFA teams and that team gets a right a of first refusal for eight players after each year that don't enter the draft.



Think outside the box!
I
IowaCougar
Money made from college football and basketball is used not only to support those sports, but all other relatively non-revenue sports as well. I can guarantee you that if schools started paying football players, it would come with the cost of eliminating some of the other sports.



In addition, you could end up with lawsuits, as the women's sports would demand equal treatment. So the only equitable way to do it without being subject to litigation would be to pay all of the athletes a stipend. This would further take money from the athletics budget, and would eventually lead to the end of college athletics entirely. It would be a slippery slope that would be a dangerous one to start down.
S
SpiffCoug
But if you made it a separate league - one in which universities paid to be a part of they might be able to get around equal treatment.
M
Mars
SpiffCoug wrote:
I believe some of the other teams in the PDL do play their players a small amount - hence my semi-pro designation, of which I very much could be wrong.

You are correct on both counts. It is considered to contain the highest level of amatuer soccer in Northern American while also technically being a semi-pro league.
Page 1 of 3
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.