AAC Student-Athletes Make Demands (Covid safety protocols, hazard pay, 20% revenue sharing)

[MilliniumPrince]

Risks associated with football are different. Players know that is part of the reality of competition, as do all athletes. Asking young adults to put their health on the line for something no one in the country has a handle on is beyond the pale.

I am proud of these kids. This is the best time to flex. A lot of institutions may be exposed when their level of dependency on football and basketball revenue is put on display. These kids are the goose and the golden egg.

The level of hypocrisy is blinding. Institutions spent months trying to figure out if they can even have students on campus, but somehow it is cool to have students playing football.

 

[billybud]

And cool to have students on campus....with a highly contagious virus.

I figure that many schools are not spending the money necessary to be safe on campus...or in football.

It's about the money in both situations...

 

[billybud]

To expect thousands of young people on campus is far more worrisome to me than the highly controlled aspects of having a football team play...with weekly testing, temperature checks every time they come in the building, etc.

 

[TU65]

This is the product of opportunistic interlocutors sowing seeds of discontent . All it takes is a few loud mouths and a grievance merchant to get the ball rolling. The right answer to this was the season is on, here are the terms, show up and play or don’t. Next man up. This is a generation of kids raised on soy milk and sour grapes.

While I agree with your message, it is lost on this generation of Americans. I believe this is being pushed by individuals connected to the UCF program, which makes sense. They actually believe they are big time, far from it, just another program in a G5 conference with a lousy media deal. You can't draw money out of a stone, the handlers pushing this nonsense need to get their kids into a P5 program if they want any chance at seeing the money.

 

[Waquoit]

Do you have any examples or comparison that can enlighten me and the rest of the old dopes on here? I'm curious as to how you can justify one generation having it more difficult than another, other than opinion.

When I was 19, a kid could go to Manchester Community College for $10. a credit. UConn was $5,000 for an entire year. They didn't have to mortgage their future to go to college. I'm curious why you are calling me out twice and not the OP that was smearing the younger generstion.

 

[UCSouth]

When I was 19, a kid could go to Manchester Community College for $10. a credit. UConn was $5,000 for an entire year. They didn't have to mortgage their future to go to college. I'm curious why you are calling me out twice and not the OP that was smearing the younger generstion.

I wasn't calling you out and I apologize that you feel that way. I thought I could get a well informed answer from you, as opposed to the OP. No reply necessary.

 

[billybud]

When I was 19, a kid could go to Manchester Community College for $10. a credit. UConn was $5,000 for an entire year. They didn't have to mortgage their future to go to college. I'm curious why you are calling me out twice and not the OP that was smearing the younger generstion.

The cost of education today is crazy...coming out of school $100,000 or more in debt ?....The average cost of a wedding in Connecticut is now reported at $43,000...what are we thinking?

In the way-way back..I was lucky enough to have a GI Bill, part time jobs and partial scholarships pay my way...zero debt out of school.

Got married in a simple ceremony...maybe $700 including flowers and simple reception...cake furnished by friend.

I have the typical geezer sticker shock at today's costs.

 

[upstater]

The cost of education today is crazy...coming out of school $100,000 or more in debt ?....The average cost of a wedding in Connecticut is now reported at $43,000...what are we thinking?

In the way-way back..I was lucky enough to have a GI Bill, part time jobs and partial scholarships pay my way...zero debt out of school.

Got married in a simple ceremony...maybe $700 including flowers and simple reception...cake furnished by friend.

I have the typical geezer sticker shock at today's costs.

$100k should never happen, & there are horror stories to make people go gaga, but the averages and facts are more reasonable when you take everything into account.

I was in school during the 1980s when the cap on guaranteed student loans was $2750. Flash forward 30 odd years later, and now the cap is $5500. That is not a huge increase given the expanse of time. It's also why the vast majority of kids coming out of school with loans have about $20k that they owe.

$100k means you were taking out private loans to pay for a private school education, which you should never ever do.

 

[CL82]

So, if they're paid 20% of AAC revenues, would they still be considered amateurs and retain their NCAA eligibility? Or would it be considered Super Extra Full Cost of Attendance?

Looks like the pigeons are coming home to roost as a result of all the huge media contracts.

Mmm, I must’ve missed that AAC huge media contract.

 

[CL82]

Plenty of people did that when buying fresh made soup...
....at this grocery store:

What the freak is he thinking?

 

[Watchdog]

Mmm, I must’ve missed that AAC huge media contract.

The primary intent of the post was to question whether the kids could/would lose their amateur status if they get 20% of their school's revenues. Or, would the NCAA move to cover that by adjusting (raising) the value of "full cost of attendance"? Additionally, how does the NCAA put in a simple dollar amount that covers all schools with such a wide variation in values of media contracts?

My comment on huge media contracts was simply musing about how the Power Five might be impacted on an even greater scale seeing that that's where the real money is and for schools losing 20% of $50,000,000 that amount could be a real problem.

 

[upstater]

The primary intent of the post was to question whether the kids could/would lose their amateur status if they get 20% of their school's revenues. Or, would the NCAA move to cover that by adjusting (raising) the value of "full cost of attendance"? Additionally, how does the NCAA put in a simple dollar amount that covers all schools with such a wide variation in values of media contracts?

My comment on huge media contracts was simply musing about how the Power Five might be impacted on an even greater scale seeing that that's where the real money is and for schools losing 20% of $50,000,000 that amount could be a real problem.

The schools could do anything they wanted. Amateur status really has no value for anyone anyway. But the tax people can and will look at that money as income.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

What the freak is he thinking?

We saw someone do this at the dessert section Disney World last year. Sampled two desserts and put them back on the display. Guy had to be in his 60s, certainly old enough to know better.

 

[CL82]

We saw someone do this at the dessert sectional Disney World last year. Sample to desserts and put them back on the display. Guy had to be in his 60s, certainly old enough to know better.

I don't get that mindset. Either you were raised by wolves, have early onset dementia, or are a complete asshat.

 

[zls44]

$100k means you were taking out private loans to pay for a private school education, which you should never ever do.

It amazes me how someone who works in higher education does not realize that this is exactly what a majority of your students are doing.

 

[upstater]

It amazes me how someone who works in higher education does not realize that this is exactly what a majority of your students are doing.

You're wrong.

First off, our tuition is $7.8k.

Secondly, the average public tuition nationally is $7.4k.

Third, average debt owed is low $20k.

Fourth, the private school market is only 14% of the entire Higher Ed. market.

These are 4 facts that show why you are wrong.

 

[zls44]

You're wrong.

First off, our tuition is $7.8k.

Secondly, the average public tuition nationally is $7.4k.

Third, average debt owed is low $20k.

Fourth, the private school market is only 14% of the entire Higher Ed. market.

These are 4 facts that show why you are wrong.

You love to hide behind tuition, as if room and board aren't factors.

 

[upstater]

You love to hide behind tuition, as if room and board aren't factors.

7 + 11 is 18.
you seem to think students aren’t going to pay for food if they don’t attend college

 

[billybud]

I was thinking my school days vs now....take a look, by school, of average law school grad indebtedness...

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/grad-debt-rankings

 

[upstater]

I was thinking my school days vs now....take a look, by school, of average law school grad indebtedness...

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-law-schools/grad-debt-rankings

This is about the vast majority of undergrads, not about professional schools.

 

[J187Money]

Honestly I think students are overplaying their hand. If I was the conference I would just pull the plug under these demands. I've said before - as long as scholarships are honored, players should be able to opt in or out, and if they opt in, it is at their own risk with reasonable protocols. The fact that many student-athletes seem to not be satisfied with just getting their education shows that the "student" part of being a student-athlete is a misnomer.

If a school has enough players opting in, it should play. If not, it shouldn't. Nobody should feel like they are forced to do anything, but students are going to get COVID if they are playing or not. I sincerely doubt that the PAC-12 and AAC athletes leading the charge have been hiding out in their basements since the middle of March. I'm sure they have all taken all sorts of "risks" that they shouldn't have, but want to put it on the conference. They don't HAVE to play. So opt out and just take your classes.

 

[Exit 4]

Honestly I think students are overplaying their hand. If I was the conference I would just pull the plug under these demands. I've said before - as long as scholarships are honored, players should be able to opt in or out, and if they opt in, it is at their own risk with reasonable protocols. The fact that many student-athletes seem to not be satisfied with just getting their education shows that the "student" part of being a student-athlete is a misnomer.

If a school has enough players opting in, it should play. If not, it shouldn't. Nobody should feel like they are forced to do anything, but students are going to get COVID if they are playing or not. I sincerely doubt that the PAC-12 and AAC athletes leading the charge have been hiding out in their basements since the middle of March. I'm sure they have all taken all sorts of "risks" that they shouldn't have, but want to put it on the conference. They don't HAVE to play. So opt out and just take your classes.

Bingo.

They way I see it:
i) Got to let kids earn sponsorship money - no limits on $$ or source....only that its disclosed and follows a form contract approved by the NCAA. I think its very hard to have any moral high ground limiting income. Stop being the aggressor here. Free markets.
ii) Got to accept the fact that there will be movements to push for more of whatever (name the cause!) which will result in threats of sit outs. Let it happen. This is a volunteer sport, one year at a time. Sit out games in one year, expect the university to take back the scholarship the following semester to find someone else who likes "the deal" which is scholarship with loaded special academic attention in trade for playing for your school + the opportunity to earn side money if you can finagle it.

Hard to predict exactly where this could go. Schools outside the P5 do not have the financial resources to give in to any of the financial demands. None. If I have a university where a culture takes hold that the kids dont want to play in mass (lets say this happens with a MAC school with persistence over a couple seasons) then I suspend the sport and let it be a loose - loose for everyone. Outside of the P5 this is strictly a voluntary adventure. Inside the P5 there might be room for some cash to the kids, but again, nothing like these kids think there is. Not at all. If things get real acrimonious I think it becomes rather easy to drop a sport and that would be the ultimate unintended consequence because there will be far more losers than winners. Try to tip the scales too hard and watch the scale fall over. Athletics aren't the mission, some smaller universities might grow to welcome the opportunity as an excuse to shut the athletic circus down and get back to stuff that helps more students more equitably than the narrow focus on athletes.

 

[upstater]

Schools outside the P5 do not have the financial resources to give in to any of the financial demands.

The vast majority of schools in the P5 are in the red, including Texas and Michigan. There are 8 schools in the black.

 

[Exit 4]

The vast majority of schools in the P5 are in the red, including Texas and Michigan. There are 8 schools in the black.

Thats because they spend the $$ on stadiums, plush training facilities, athlete dorms, lazy rivers, outrageous coaching salaries, extended staffing, etc. They are spending it to hide it. A lot of it is dumped into money losing olympic sports.

Of course the obvious other unintended consequence of caving to the football kids on financial demands is that the olympic sports are going to lose that support which will result in lesser facilities and perhaps ultimately termination of programs. Been seeing alot of that already in college athletics as you know w/o any football caving.

 

[NorwalkHusky]

Honestly I think they should push student athletes to do local commercials and get paid to endorse products and places. Dude imagine how much Joe Burrow would have made just by doing some dumb local ads etc.

 

[J187Money]

The only problem I have with the name/likeness thing is that people will drive a truck through it and it will become a way for donors to just pay for players to come to their schools. Not that it is a bad idea for the students, but will be super hard to enforce fairness. But I think we are way past that anyway.

 

[Exit 4]

The only problem I have with the name/likeness thing is that people will drive a truck through it and it will become a way for donors to just pay for players to come to their schools. Not that it is a bad idea for the students, but will be super hard to enforce fairness. But I think we are way past that anyway.

Can't stop that. When schools function this way (prohibiting compensation) they are acting as a cartel with monopoly powers.

We need to let it happen.

And schools need a new system to help rebalance competition like granting more scholarships to losing programs or reducing scholarships for winning programs or allowing more immediate play transfers slots for losing programs, etc.

 

[upstater]

Thats because they spend the $$ on stadiums, plush training facilities, athlete dorms, lazy rivers, outrageous coaching salaries, extended staffing, etc. They are spending it to hide it. A lot of it is dumped into money losing olympic sports.

Of course the obvious other unintended consequence of caving to the football kids on financial demands is that the olympic sports are going to lose that support which will result in lesser facilities and perhaps ultimately termination of programs. Been seeing alot of that already in college athletics as you know w/o any football caving.

Because of Title 9 they have no choice.

They can deescalate on coaching salaries at any time by doing what UConn did and maxing it at $1m, but that will cut down on your coaching candidates.

Spending to hide it? The hiding is in messing around with the athletic budget and not including athletic expenditures by moving them over tot eh academic side. The other hiding is in having each and every student pay for athletic department subsidies. Who are the true customers that this information must be hidden from? Parents.

 

[Exit 4]

Because of Title 9 they have no choice.

They can deescalate on coaching salaries at any time by doing what UConn did and maxing it at $1m, but that will cut down on your coaching candidates.

Spending to hide it? The hiding is in messing around with the athletic budget and not including athletic expenditures by moving them over tot eh academic side. The other hiding is in having each and every student pay for athletic department subsidies. Who are the true customers that this information must be hidden from? Parents.

Point is - there is some money to be had even at the P5 programs that report losses. What it does to Title IX is university problem. These aren't necessarily my views, but its how the kids/parents of football players will see it.

 

[upstater]

Point is - there is some money to be had even at the P5 programs that report losses. What it does to Title IX is university problem. These aren't necessarily my views, but its how the kids/parents of football players will see it.

Well, I do know that the entirety of the tweeting universe sees this as a form of mass exploitation to be rectified. And that may be. I can even sympathize with that. But I don't think they're going to like the resolution ultimately.

Just reading this board, you come to realize that the vast majority of fans are in favor of facility updates because we think it's what is needed to keep up with the joneses. You see this in pro sports too when perfectly fine 20 year old stadiums are junked for new ones, on the taxpayer's dime.