Should college football players be paid? They make millions of dollars for the college. Coaches make millions. Should players make some money too?
Yes. The majority of college football players DON’T go on to the NFL. And they aren’t permitted to hold down any other jobs while on the team. The schools are making money off their labor so yes, they should be paid. Now, I don’t have a problem deducting their tuition and room and board from that pay. But some of those players bring in a lot more money for the school then what it costs to cover their scholarship.
absolutely not if they want to get paid then forego going to college and try and get directly onto an NFL team. Nobody twists the arm of any student athlete or holds them at gun point to play a sport. It is a personal decision. If the student athlete gets a full ride scholarship then there is great value in that. If the player is not receiving any, or minimal scholarship money such as lacrosse, soccer etc then it's for love of the sport and wanting to represent your school.
Even though they get free scholarships, room, board and pampering, only an extremely limited amount of college football players get to turn professional. Except for the chosen, they, like all the other undergraduates end of flipping burgers. Many fans are saying that while playing for the college and financing the school's entire athletic program, they should be paid for their unique services to the school. The Duke head football coach said at a news conference yesterday that his players are well cared for by him and the University and they do not need to be paid money. He said nobody is getting rich from money being generated by his football team. The local media seized on his statement by pointing out that his salary is 1.7 million dollars a year!
I think that the ones that are not getting scholarships for football should be paid a small stipend. If they are playing football on a scholarship then no because they are already getting tens of thousands of dollars in free education and lets face it most of the people that are going to a large university on football scholarships are not going to go on to be the Einteins of the world. As has been mentioned they cannot work nearly as many hours as someone with just school and and studying and playing/practicing football, or any sport for that matter, takes away from the available work time. The university makes big money off of the players and it should be treated as if they were working directly for the university as a parking meter checker or someone who does maintenance. I would say pay them by the hour whatever they pay the students that work at the library or any other student job which in my state was the minimum wage. They also need to stop with all this paranoia about bribery scandal. Seriously, a university here was fined because the players got free or discounted shoes at a shoe store. Wow, because everyone knows that the perk I that will sway me to go to university X instead of university Y is cheaper shoes. I get that you shouldn't be giving them thousands of dollars in cash or alumni buying them cars etc. But something that is less than the value of $100 or so is not going to sway anyone to go to a university if they were leaning towards another one.
how much money a university brings in from the football program is irrelevant. There are HS programs which fund all sports thanks in part to revenue from football. Should HS football players also be paid? It doesn't matter if it's one dollar or 500 million dollars, the number isn't the point. If an athlete is looking to earn money through sport then let them try the professional path. Most great footballers overseas never attend university. Baseball and hockey here are similar. Did anyone consider that college, especially at the big programs may actually groom players so they are marketable to the NFL? Perhaps the colleges should be given a % of the salary from professionals for consideration of preparing them? Interesting point, isn't it?
I am not for paying college football players per se. What I am against is the colleges making money off of a players name by selling their jerseys, and the player not getting anything on the back end. Sorry, that is that man's name it doesn't belong to the university. The university can sell "generic jerseys" and the like but I find it hypocritical to tell a man he can not make money off of his own name and turn around and market that same name for revenues that go to the college. No that is not right. And if a player has the ability to go out and make money on his own name a la Johnny Football, so be it, cap the earnings, and split with the school as the name ususally is on school merchandise.
I can agree with the point about jerseys. The colleges "own" the IP of the design, the logo and even the numbers. It should stop with names. I am not sure of any IP laws which stops a consumer from having any name they desire put onto a jersey. Many stores simply carry generic team jerseys with a number and no name. I do however believe that Tebow jerseys were sold with his name
It is truly touchy, however we know if we were to walk into a store in college station and the are selling a #2 football jersey, name on the back or not we know "who" they are selling. Same with a #10 jersey in Tuscaloosa, etc...A simple solution to that would be for Universties to select a block of jersey numbers (3-4) retire them, and market those to the fans as generic jerseys. The television deals are astronomical today, and even for the smaller schools who are getting crazy money for the size of the institution is crazy. I think I saw where OSU paid Florida A&M 900,000 to play that game on Saturday, don't hold me to that figure, it may be less. Mike and Mike were talking to Kirk H. and he was discussing those types of games and how he really felt that the schools who schedule games like that are pathetic, and he ripped Louisville for it too, all the old Oklahoma and Nebraska teams, it was a great interview.
It's about getting a winning season and hopefully to a big bowl game or the championship game. What good was actually done by sending ND to the championship game last year? I do not propose having a Louisville, Oregon or Clemson play several games against Bama, LSU, A+M etc. and those teams would not want to play a couple of good SEC teams each year as it would be defeats for them and they'd get banged up. Frankly, it's better football watching the SEC beat up on each other. The issue is a 2 loss SEC team is better than most other teams. As much as I like to gloat about the national championship, to me, the true championship is played in Georgia. There is no parity within college ball and that is why more and more I'm leaning against the nat'l championship. Let divisions have their championship and then have bowl games where it's mixed up every year for example, SEC champ plays ACC champ one year and then ACC champ plays Pac 12 champ the next year. I like the Rose Bowl and an OSU vs Oregon would be a good game this year but why not PAC 12 vs Big 12 next year?
We all know its about winning championships and the SEC has had a stranglehold for the last 7 years. Let me be clear when I say this. The top teams in the SEC (Bama, LSU, A&M, Florida, SC, and UGA) are better than the top 6 in any other conference in the country. But I also think they are more vulnerable this year than they have been in the past. I am not saying it will happen, but I would not be shocked to see a team like Oregon or Clemson knock off and win a National Championship. Again, not saying it will happen, just wouldn't be shocked if it did. Bear with me, as I make a case, let's take Clemson. Already beat UGA, will face SC and FSU and Miami(all ranked in the top 25 as of now)all this season, if they run the table, and don't lose a silly game, there is no case to be made for a 2 loss SEC team to compete for a national championship, I don't think you could make a case for a 1 loss Alabama or LSU team either. Clemson will be undefeated with wins over 4 top 25 schools, and 2-0 vs the SEC on the season. Any arguement against them playing for a national championship in this scenario is pointless, because there is none. Now Oregon on the other hand will need a lot to happen in my opinion, and as you know, I am just not sold on OSU. Maybe that will change if they beat Wiscinsin this week we will just have to see. LSU does not have an easy game this week going to UGA. LSU is playing well, but UGA is a different team between the hedges. We just have to see how it pans out.
Les has one challenge and that is to keep his kids and staff focused for the full 60 minutes. He has never been one to run up a score against an opponent. But, if he keeps the accelerator pedal to the floor, there is no team which will defeat LSU. The issue is to keep pounding instead of going into game mgmt mode Richt could figure a way to stop the LSU running game but this year, LSU has a serious pass attack as well. Les Miles sits in the shadows of Nick Saban because they are in the same division. But, he might portray himself as a good ole boy but he is one heck of a coach. He knows the caliber of team he is blessed to have this year.
I am not saying UGA will win, just saying they are a different team on the road than they are at home. LSU will have to run the ball as a shootout will not be condusive against UGA. If they can develop the run and keep UGA honest on defense, then they will be ripe for the deadliest play in football, the play action. I have LSU winning, not knocking Les, but its easy to be a great coach when you are consistantly getting some of the best talent in the country. Look for heavy doses og the run from UGA as well, I seem to recall them having a pretty good tailback there.....Gurley? Yep, that's it. And Murray is no slouch, it won't be as easy as you think.
