• Fair Pay to Play Act

 #17872  by Bootie
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:11 am
fufanatic wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:39 am
I think this is right, but I will say I've battled back and forth over this for years now, and still struggle today with it. In addition to free scholarships (which is a huge deal and vastly underrated ... education can change lives and family fortunes), I know what all the major programs can provide (which would cost a lot for you and me to have) including: a free strength and conditioning coach and facility, a free nutritionist, free gear, free unlimited food, free travel, free tutors if needed, free housing, a monthly stipend, star status that could lead to a job interview or opportunities following graduation, etc. The list is long, very impressive, and hard to put an exact money total on. But is it enough? Especially at the monster revenue generating schools. I don't know the answer for sure. I will say I don't think competitive balance will shift much at all if players do start getting paid on top of all that I mentioned above. In college football, it's been Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma and Ohio State for several years now, and this year is shaping up no differently. And I doubt it opens the door to much more corruption, if any, which I'm confident is more prevalent than we know about.

But like many of you, it scares me to think what college sports will look like in the future. Will Group of 5/FCS college football be able to survive? What about non-revenue generating sports? They might have a hard time surviving without major individual donors. Guess we will find out in the years to come.
I love the list of things you made because they're all relevant and significant factors of compensation/reward.

To your question of "is it enough?" YES. We know it is enough because the market proves it. Players are not opting out of the current agreement. In fact, there are thousands of players lining up to do it for the current arrangement without added compensation. Why the hell someone would offer to pay someone for a job when people are lining up to do it for free is beyond my level of comprehension.
 #17873  by 76MrMoto
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:42 am
They are already getting paid via "full cost of attendance" payments. All FBS schools pay this and some FCS schools (e.g. ETSU, etc.) pay it. Therefore, Furman for past 4-5 years has been faced with recruiting against schools who pay "Full cost of attendance". Good article from USA Today last year (find at https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/n ... /38345017/ ) that explains how some ACC footballl players use this money. Therefore, issue is not their getting paid, instead how much more will they get.
 #17874  by Fred Garvin
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:57 am
1. Allow students to move off campus again.
2. Give the players their "dorm money" to live off campus. Probably triple what it was 30 + years ago....
3. Hello Hoodwinds and The Lost Colony......
cavedweller2, FUBeAR, sluggo liked this
 #17875  by paladinduece
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:12 pm
Some initial things that come to mind. How is the player to negotiate the deal? Will there be an agent? I am sure several of these young men are not in a position to make sound decisions on their own. If so who pays for the agent? Or its a representative of the school? What if school x gets the guy with the most contacts thus allowing them a recruiting advantage promising deals to incoming kids? How would you regulate boosters funneling money into Jim Bobs Buick dealership to basically act as a way of laundering their money? Word on the street gets out, and players realize this, it blows up. Now, how much time and resources are spent investigating this? Who pays for that? This is the tip of the iceberg there are a ton of other scenarios that will come up and many of which wont show until it is in place. My opinion, and it may be unpopular is, keep this out. It will scar the game forever. College football is still somewhat pure compared to the crooked world we live in. I am all for increasing stipends to a fair amount with a cap so no school gains an advantage. I am not including FCS schools in this argument because of resources, but it would trickle down as there are some programs that could use this with more resources available. As far as the coach getting endorsements and a player can't?? That's life. My boss makes more money than me, but I do more work and I am more knowledgeable about our business. He is a relative of the founder. Everything today is trying to make things equitable and fair. Sometimes that is great, but don't destroy something to make sure everybody gets there piece of the pie. If they are good enough to bring sales to a legit company chances are pretty good they will get a Sunday check. If there were an injury? well so goes life. This will lead to the end of football as we know it. The pro game isn't football anymore and I would hate to see this play out.
Bootie liked this
 #17876  by FUpaladin08
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:22 pm
FUPlayer74 wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:43 am
NCAA can't control the P5 conferences and they know it. P5 should break away and form their own professional league with ties to the NFL. Guys who want to go to college can play FCS ball.
I've been thinking the same for awhile. P5 have all the leverage and could easily break with the NCAA. I know we're on a football thread, but it's even more obvious in basketball with 1 and done players. NCAA is treated like the minor leagues for NBA and NFL, so might as well tighten that Bond and handle like explained above.
 #17879  by Flagman
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:11 pm
Bootie wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:22 am
Flagman wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:06 am
Coaches are allowed to give endorsements. Look at Dabo and the security company he endorses. And now we see Sabin all over quacking for AFLAC.
I don't think this was questioned anywhere... help me with your point here, Flags... Are you saying that because coaches get endorsements players should too?
I was just pointing out an argument proponents will use to push for these payments. Just sayin’.
Bootie liked this
 #17880  by gman
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:38 pm
Pay for play is going to happen. I’m more afraid of it’s effect on our basketball recruiting than football. I’ll ask the question again. Can the Furman’s of the sports stay competitive without paying players?
 #17900  by FurmAlum
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:45 pm
This is a bad idea and will probably ruin college football as we know it. I agree with FU74. Let the players that want to go to college play in the FCS. One reason I like Furman and FCS football is that its not all about the money. (I know this sounds naive but the players play for the love of the game.) And the coaches too, to some degree.

P.S. I know this is a football thread but....there is too much money involved now in both FBS football and major college basketball. I grew up in N.C and I am a big UNC Tarheel basketball fan (except when they are playing FU), but how can a school have fake classes for 15 years and get off scot free with no NCAA violations? The answer is they had $15,000,000 to spend on d*** lawyers!

P.S.S. How much f****** money do Dabo and Saban need to make? I wouldn't buy an AFLAC policy now if it was the last one on earth!
 #17901  by gofurman
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:26 pm
FurmAlum wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:45 pm
This is a bad idea and will probably ruin college football as we know it. I agree with FU74. Let the players that want to go to college play in the FCS. One reason I like Furman and FCS football is that its not all about the money. (I know this sounds naive but the players play for the love of the game.) And the coaches too, to some degree.

P.S. I know this is a football thread but....there is too much money involved now in both FBS football and major college basketball. I grew up in N.C and I am a big UNC Tarheel basketball fan (except when they are playing FU), but how can a school have fake classes for 15 years and get off scot free with no NCAA violations? The answer is they had $15,000,000 to spend on d*** lawyers!

P.S.S. How much f****** money do Dabo and Saban need to make? I wouldn't buy an AFLAC policy now if it was the last one on earth!
thank you for admitting that. I am a Duke fan :D - and they probably paid Zion as Clemson was caught offering him money and he chose Duke... that said, my kid had a Zion shirt last year and that was not right (it was a gift) and several of his buddies had one too. That isn't right. SKetchy peole were selling these shirts which were clearly ZIon and his likeness and Zion got none of it.. $0 Now before someone says he got his 100 million now - what if he had gotten hurt? the only money he would have gotten' would have been the scholarship despite bringing way more than that to Duke. I struggle with that one. If people are going to sell a shirt that says Zion and shows his picture he should get some of that - that's just fair market in anything...

That said, I REALLY hope pay for play doesn't ruin FCS football. I haven't read up on all of it but if there is a 5K pay or whatever will we lose all the best guys to other FCS schools that are state funded? like UTC? or is that not what is proposed? I am not worried about the Trevor Lawrence of the world or Sammy Watkins - that doesn't affect us.

can someone explain it to me? thanks!
 #17903  by gofurman
 Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:49 pm
cavedweller2 wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:28 am
NCAA needs to step up and say the any one taking money under these circumstances is ineligible and any school that uses an ineligible player is in violation and will suffer penalties. But they wont.
ncaa ain't gonna do shttt
 #17946  by sluggo
 Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:18 pm
Bootie wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:11 am
Why the hell someone would offer to pay someone for a job when people are lining up to do it for free is beyond my level of comprehension.
I don't know; ask Charlie Sheen.
Bootie liked this
 #17949  by Paul C
 Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:27 pm
Bootie wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:28 am
The star player getting endorsements while their O-Line get nothing is unfair. The whole things stinks. The star player is getting paid for his market value with his signing bonus in a few years.
Per Spotrac, Avg NFL Salary for a QB is $6.3m and for an OL is $3.1m....is that not fair? Tight End's avg $1.9m....is that really unfair?

Even on the OL, avg salary for a LT is $7.2m and the LG playing right next to him is $2.7m Is that unfair?
Bootie liked this
 #17952  by Bootie
 Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:34 pm
Paul C wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:27 pm
Bootie wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:28 am
The star player getting endorsements while their O-Line get nothing is unfair. The whole things stinks. The star player is getting paid for his market value with his signing bonus in a few years.
Per Spotrac, Avg NFL Salary for a QB is $6.3m and for an OL is $3.1m....is that not fair? Tight End's avg $1.9m....is that really unfair?

Even on the OL, avg salary for a LT is $7.2m and the LG playing right next to him is $2.7m Is that unfair?
Paul, I’m talking about college players.
 #17953  by sluggo
 Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:41 pm
It's better to embrace reality than to get run over by it.
Sooner or later it's going to happen anyway; it's just a matter of who will change last.

Why be last?
 #17965  by Paul C
 Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:32 pm
Bootie wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:34 pm
Paul C wrote:
Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:27 pm
Bootie wrote:
Wed Oct 02, 2019 10:28 am
The star player getting endorsements while their O-Line get nothing is unfair. The whole things stinks. The star player is getting paid for his market value with his signing bonus in a few years.
Per Spotrac, Avg NFL Salary for a QB is $6.3m and for an OL is $3.1m....is that not fair? Tight End's avg $1.9m....is that really unfair?

Even on the OL, avg salary for a LT is $7.2m and the LG playing right next to him is $2.7m Is that unfair?
Paul, I’m talking about college players.
I’m talking about football players playing a game for entertainment purposes.

Seriously tho, I love the status quo, but it’s gonna change, there is just too much money involved nowadays....