Free stuff and amateurism

Thought experiment for those of you who believe the value of a college scholarship is sufficient compensation for a student-athlete:  what would be sufficient compensation for a student-athlete in a world where college tuition was zero?

Side question:  what would such a development do to schools like Georgia that charge their athletic departments for the cost of student-athlete’s tuition?

Advertisements

32 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

32 responses to “Free stuff and amateurism

  1. Gaskilldawg

    Sorry, Senator, of the 100 responses you will get 98 will be about politics and 2 will respond to your question.

    Like

  2. PTCDAWG

    How can it be free? Are Pros going to work free? Is building upkeep going to be free? Are power companies going to remove meters from campus?

    Like

  3. Based on the NFL draft it seems our players are getting a pretty good deal with their scholarship. To answer your question, if tuition, fees, books, room and board were free then sufficient compensation would be about $2500 a month during the season for 99% of the guys out there….if they did away with the rules forbidding players to enter the draft straight out of high school.

    Like

    • So, you cut their overall compensation and condition even that on the NFL changing a rule it has no interest in changing. That’s mighty generous on your part.

      Like

      • Who said I would be paying them?

        Like

        • “… then sufficient compensation would be about $2500 a month during the season …”

          Like

          • Sherlock

            Ger out of Lawyer mode and try to read the posts for what they say and not what you want to argue against. Dudemankind is equating the cost of tutition (I’m assuming instate considering the numbers), books, room, and board to $2500 a month.

            Like

            • Four-month season, say, equates to $10000, then. Current in state UGA tuition is $11634; throw in COA stipend and you’re over what he’s willing to pay — if the NFL eliminates the three years after HS rule for eligibility. Out of state tuition is $29844.

              Maybe I’m in lawyer mode, but that sure looks like a cut to me.

              Like

              • Sherlock

                4 month season

                It is a 12 month year. A reasonable person would assume that Dudemankind was estimating ~30K per year for tuition, books, room, and board per annum. I wasn’t trying to defend his math so much as his intent.

                Like

                • He used the phrase “during the season”. Clearly, you, as a reasonable person, have much more insight into his thinking than do I, in lawyer mode. I stand corrected.

                  Like

                  • Actually the $2500 has nothing to do with how much the scholarship is worth and everything to do with the fact that if paid they would become minor league semi-professionals. Minor league players don’t make squat, in any sport, anywhere that I have heard of, but I could be wrong. What makes these guys any different? Don’t get me wrong, I think it sucks that some people make millions and others make $30,000 a year playing the same sport. How much do YOU want to pay them? Do they all make the same in your model? Probably about 15,000 players in the FBS to consider.

                    Like

                    • How much do I want to pay them?

                      Whatever the market will bear, just like everybody else.

                      Like

                    • Mayor

                      We have a serious problem with education in this country. The way college athletics is run doesn’t help one iota. A clown like Bowlesby getting $20 Mil while the players get paid nothing sickens me.

                      Like

                    • Dawgflan

                      they would become minor league semi-professionals. Minor league players don’t make squat, in any sport, anywhere that I have heard of….

                      Maybe that’s because there aren’t many semi-pro leagues with entire networks, national broadcast deals, and billions the n merchandising attached.

                      Like

    • Why exactly are you cutting off their compensation at the Scholly? While every single person around the players make more money every year…..they see no increase outside incremental changes for tuition pricing

      Like

  4. On the athletic question, the other fees would still be there – residence, books, out of state tuition, and other fees. So, the transfer would still be there.

    On the economic question, tuition and fees will rise by whatever subsidy the federal government put in place. There’s no such thing as a free lunch no matter how much we wish it were true.

    Like

  5. UGA85

    I guess the question is about socialism? What do college athletics look like in a socialist setting? I can’t really say or guess. But, as the cost of a college education continues to skyrocket, the amount given to college athletes continues to skyrocket as well. I can’t guess in today’s dollars how much an athlete receives over four years, but it is certainly substantial. The question is always whether the athletes are actually receiving an education. If they are, then the hundreds of thousands of dollars being poured into them will be received with gratitude and will prove to be a great investment. If they aren’t, then no amount of money will ever be enough, because they haven’t learned to value things that really matter.

    Like

  6. Dave

    I’m pretty sure college tuition would not be zero. Even if that was true, it would likely be in name only, and that revenue would have to come from somewhere else (taxes and gov. debt). Im assuming that is what you are asking. I wouldn’t see much changing in that model- they are underpaid now, and still would be. If you are asking if there really is no revenue, then the university would cease to function, and I would think the athletic football and basketball teams would organize as pro minor league feeder teams driven by market demand.

    Like

    • Question isn’t on the revenue side; it’s on the expense side. A number of folks believe that a full scholarship is sufficient compensation for student-athletes. If the laws change and no one who qualified under Sen. Harris’ proposal, for example, has to pay tuition, then that value drops to zero. What then becomes sufficient compensation for those student-athletes?

      Like

      • Uglydawg

        What do most college kids make at a part-time job? Minimum wage? Probably at first. Pay incoming freshmen min wage per hour for practice and game time. Pay sophomores a dollar an hour more, and juniors another dollar etc. . But these guys also get great food, tutorial services, medical care and other perks…so consider that also. Lots of colllege kids live on Raman Noodles, Peanut butter and jelly, etc…so the food is a deal.
        My ideas may be wrong, but what is really, really wrong is school and athletic administrators and associates getting filthy rich off of the programs that are required by the NCAA to treat athletes the poor way in which they do. Some of these kids can’t afford to do much of anything. The can’t even have a little job or legally take gifts. That’s wrong.

        Like

        • Dawgflan

          What minimum wage job can one sign up for to (on one hand) be cheered on by millions of adoring fans and (on the other hand) risk knee tears, concussions, and broken bones every time they clock in?

          Like

      • Dave

        Expenses are still there Senator…professors, buildings, million dollar coaches etc. won’t change no? Not seeing this as a change honestly. They would calculate the expense or cost of that and slap that value on it as “educational value”. The value doesn’t drop to zero, just because a car is paid by someone else, for example. Same here. For the record, I’m with u on market value….but not seeing how this would do anything to change current arrangement…..

        Like

        • Not sure I follow you here. Marginal expense for the items you cite (professors, buildings, million dollar coaches) is zero for any individual athlete. In other words, those expenses won’t lessen if there were one less student-athlete in attendance.

          More to the point, under the hypothetical, those student-athletes are being compensated in exactly the same way every student on campus is, when it comes to scholarships. If those who have pointed to the current full scholarship for student-athletes as adequate compensation for their services are correct in their assessment, how then to adjust in a world where that’s no longer the case?

          Like

  7. AusDawg85

    Under that proposal, football and basketball players should PAY about $10,000 per year. That’s right…pay…their taxes on the value of the additional stipends and benefits they receive over other college students. In that world, it would only be “fair” and the tax rate would need to be about 50% or more to try to sustain such a huge national benefit.

    But don’t worry about the kids. Taxes are always paid by the consumers (fans) since prices will skyrocket to pay for this. I hear the model is working just fine in Venezuela. Viva La Revolution!

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Mike from Myrtle Beach

    Football players with below average grades/test scores receive a HUGE benefit by way of lowered admissions requirements

    Like

  9. W Cobb Dawg

    Considering a kid born today will probably live to at least 90, four more years of education would be a good, no great, investment. There’s no shortage of money to fund the education and pay for players, but it’s all siphoned off – generally by the 1%. Can’t believe the bitching about socialism when clowns like Emmert and Delaney are scamming cfb for multi millions.

    Like

  10. 92 grad

    I’m stuck at what would happen to the fundamental concept of a university if it became free to everyone. Basically makes a bachelor degree a high school diploma.

    Like