Edsall Says Pay CFB Players

[TouchdownHusky]

I don't think I've ever seen someone so out of touch with reality in my life.

There is no developmental league for the NFL. There's only college. They aren't allowed to enter the draft until they've been out of school for three years. So anyone with NFL aspirations HAS TO go to college.

Also, the guys who are valuable are not allowed to profit off their value. Jersey sales? No. Appearance fee? No. Endorsement? Nope. YouTube page with ads? Negative.

Why? Because that money could go to the NCAA and the school instead. If Barbarino Nissan wants to pay Jalen Adams $20k to do a commercial he should be allowed to do it. Anyone arguing otherwise only wants to keep these guys as indentured servants.

The point isn't that they're being "paid" with a free education, the point is many, many others are getting rich off the players, and the system is built in a manner that exploits the athletes responsible for the NCAA and university getting billions from CBS and ESPN.

Comments like this last one make you look like a special kind of moron. Many of the athletes are more than capable in the classroom. And it's not the players forcing the school to lower their standards for those who aren't, it's the schools doing it on their own because of THE AMOUNT OF MONEY INVOLVED.

They are being paid: approximately $100,000 per year. Period. The players should not be able to use their status as a UConn player (or any other school) to profit. If they weren't an athlete at UConn (or any other big time program) they would have little value. And, it doesn't matter what the university is making, the players agreed to a full college scholarship as fair value for their services.

Maybe college sports should adopt a no scholarship model, so that these players can work after classes to pay off loans . . . and maybe appreciate better the wonderful opportunity they have.

 

[BlueMAB]

They are being paid: approximately $100,000 per year. Period. The players should not be able to use their status as a UConn player (or any other school) to profit. If they weren't an athlete at UConn (or any other big time program) they would have little value. And, it doesn't matter what the university is making, the players agreed to a full college scholarship as fair value for their services.

Maybe college sports should adopt a no scholarship model, so that these players can work after classes to pay off loans . . . and maybe appreciate better the wonderful opportunity they have.

This is a moronic argument. If the athletes weren't at D1 schools they wouldn't be making millions off of them.

You obviously don't realize it, but there's an entire FBI investigation into the amount of money being thrown at these kids, and it's in the millions. One player got $100k in one season. That money wasn't given to him because he didn't have any value outside of Arizona. It was given to him because the amount of value he has even without Arizon. If they could have signed him straight out of high school, they would have.

The players have no choice but to take the scholarship, you're arguing they made a free decision in a free market. That's not true for football players, and arguing a HS basketball player should just go overseas for a year is equally moronic.

I'd love to know where you're getting this $100k a year number from. My guess is you pulled it straight from your arse.

And FYI, even if they refused the scholarship, they still couldn't profit off anything to do with their athleticism or they lose eligibility. I'm not even arguing UConn has to pay them, I'm saying they should be allowed to profit off their value. Just because my employer is paying me, doesn't mean I can't have multiple streams of revenue.

Maybe I should tell you exactly how much you're allowed to make, that you're not allowed any other jobs or sources of revenue, and that your family should continue to live in poverty while those running the system you're forced into are becoming millionaires.

 

[kibblesnbits]

Frankly, I’m wondering if Edsall is losing his grip on reality. He’s the 7 figure (yes, I know, just barely) coach of a program that is losing millions in an athletic department that is right up among the top in terms of subsidy from the university.

See: https://senate.uconn.edu/wp-content...Senate-UBC-Report-on-AD-Subsidy-to-Senate.pdf

Combine that with a state that is in rough shape financially and will probably keep reducing its support and you have to wonder what he’s thinking when he’s proposing to add millions in new expenses (including other major men’s sports and Title IX impacts). Maybe he’s decided he can’t repeat his success here and is looking for a way to get terminated so he can collect on the rest of his contract.

 

[Exit 4]

Frankly, I’m wondering if Edsall is losing his grip on reality. He’s the 7 figure (yes, I know, just barely) coach of a program that is losing millions in an athletic department that is right up among the top in terms of subsidy from the university.

See: https://senate.uconn.edu/wp-content...Senate-UBC-Report-on-AD-Subsidy-to-Senate.pdf

Combine that with a state that is in rough shape financially and will probably keep reducing its support and you have to wonder what he’s thinking when he’s proposing to add millions in new expenses (including other major men’s sports and Title IX impacts). Maybe he’s decided he can’t repeat his success here and is looking for a way to get terminated so he can collect on the rest of his contract.

I haven't read all of Randy's quotes on this subject. Has he toss out a #?

Maybe Randy believes that kids should get some nominal figure, lets say 5k a year or that schools should have the option to pay a certain number of players, but not the entire roster. Maybe Randy is just exhausted from the endless policing that needs to be done to comply with the NCAA on the issue of gifts/cash...and maybe Randy is just disgusted that coaches salaries continue to get insane and figures paying players would help curb that insanity. I don't know what Randy is really thinking, but maybe these are some of the angles.

I dont want to pay players, but I could see the merits in creating a new class of football scholarship where say 10 of the 85 scholarships come with 10k of annual cash compensation. This could be used to help with all programs deal with this truly disadvantage kids.

 

[Hornet22]

They are being paid: approximately $100,000 per year. Period. The players should not be able to use their status as a UConn player (or any other school) to profit. If they weren't an athlete at UConn (or any other big time program) they would have little value. And, it doesn't matter what the university is making, the players agreed to a full college scholarship as fair value for their services.

Maybe college sports should adopt a no scholarship model, so that these players can work after classes to pay off loans . . . and maybe appreciate better the wonderful opportunity they have.

Simple question that you’re not answering...And I hear what you’re saying about the “being paid with a scholarship,” theory. But explain why they shouldn’t be able to profit off of their value? How is that harming the NCAA? If player X is good enough to have companies offer money to use his likeness how does that harm the NCAA? What if player X is taking full advantage of his scholly and is kicking ass in his sport, hasn’t he/she earned the right to profit off their talent in excess of the scholarship?
On the back end perhaps that would incentivize some players to stay in school a little longer since they’re making extra money and truly love being at said school?

 

[kibblesnbits]

I haven't read all of Randy's quotes on this subject. Has he toss out a #?

Maybe Randy believes that kids should get some nominal figure, lets say 5k a year or that schools should have the option to pay a certain number of players, but not the entire roster. Maybe Randy is just exhausted from the endless policing that needs to be done to comply with the NCAA on the issue of gifts/cash...and maybe Randy is just disgusted that coaches salaries continue to get insane and figures paying players would help curb that insanity. I don't know what Randy is really thinking, but maybe these are some of the angles.

I dont want to pay players, but I could see the merits in creating a new class of football scholarship where say 10 of the 85 scholarships come with 10k of annual cash compensation. This could be used to help with all programs deal with this truly disadvantage kids.

Yes and you nailed it. At one point in his latest pitch he threw out $10K as a figure. I don’t believe he talked about different classes of scholarships, but yours is an interesting idea. On the other hand I’m sure others will say 10 scholarships and $10K aren’t enough.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I'd love to know where you're getting this $100k a year number from. My guess is you pulled it straight from your arse.

Maybe $100,000 is high, but ask any family trying to put a kid through college (room and board) how much it costs and how valuable a full schoarship would be to them.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Simple question that you’re not answering...And I hear what you’re saying about the “being paid with a scholarship,” theory. But explain why they shouldn’t be able to profit off of their value? How is that harming the NCAA? If player X is good enough to have companies offer money to use his likeness how does that harm the NCAA? What if player X is taking full advantage of his scholly and is kicking ass in his sport, hasn’t he/she earned the right to profit off their talent in excess of the scholarship?
On the back end perhaps that would incentivize some players to stay in school a little longer since they’re making extra money and truly love being at said school?

The athlete himself has no value other than what the school has allowed them to have through exosure. Why are high school athletes profiting off their talents (save for full rides and under the table violations of NCAA rules)?

 

[BlueMAB]

Maybe $100,000 is high, but ask any family trying to put a kid through college (room and board) how much it costs and how valuable a full schoarship would be to them.

I don't need to ask, I know first hand. And it's not $100k. It's typically half that, and if you go in-state, it's closer to a third or less. Like I said, you're talking out of your arse. You uninformed, out of touch with reality, and mind-numbingly stupid. Your argument boils down to "because I say so", you have no logical argument for why an athlete shouldn't be allowed to earn revenue off of his value, while the school and NCAA, does.

The athlete himself has no value other than what the school has allowed them to have through exosure. Why are high school athletes profiting off their talents (save for full rides and under the table violations of NCAA rules)?

This is epic. You keep saying they have no value other than what the "school allows" but then you acknowledge the fact these kids are getting paid BEFORE they even enter the school. That means they have value.

My God you're an idiot. There have been logical arguments against paying kids that I just disagree with. Yours is nothing like that. You ignore reality, make a statement as if it's fact, only to prove yourself wrong in the very next sentence. The player wouldn't have value without the school? False. That's why they're getting paid before they even commit to going to the schools. The opposite of your argument is what is true. Without the players, there would be no sports. Period. No money from TV. No money from sponsors. Nothing.

 

[WrenchFan69]

I haven't read all of Randy's quotes on this subject. Has he toss out a #?

Maybe Randy believes that kids should get some nominal figure, lets say 5k a year or that schools should have the option to pay a certain number of players, but not the entire roster. Maybe Randy is just exhausted from the endless policing that needs to be done to comply with the NCAA on the issue of gifts/cash...and maybe Randy is just disgusted that coaches salaries continue to get insane and figures paying players would help curb that insanity. I don't know what Randy is really thinking, but maybe these are some of the angles.

I dont want to pay players, but I could see the merits in creating a new class of football scholarship where say 10 of the 85 scholarships come with 10k of annual cash compensation. This could be used to help with all programs deal with this truly disadvantage kids.

Every full-ride football player at UConn gets a cost-of-attendance check for about $7k. They can use it how they see fit.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I don't need to ask, I know first hand. And it's not $100k. It's typically half that, and if you go in-state, it's closer to a third or less. Like I said, you're talking out of your arse. You uninformed, out of touch with reality, and mind-numbingly stupid. Your argument boils down to "because I say so", you have no logical argument for why an athlete shouldn't be allowed to earn revenue off of his value, while the school and NCAA, does.

This is epic. You keep saying they have no value other than what the "school allows" but then you acknowledge the fact these kids are getting paid BEFORE they even enter the school. That means they have value.

My God you're an idiot. There have been logical arguments against paying kids that I just disagree with. Yours is nothing like that. You ignore reality, make a statement as if it's fact, only to prove yourself wrong in the very next sentence. The player wouldn't have value without the school? False. That's why they're getting paid before they even commit to going to the schools. The opposite of your argument is what is true. Without the players, there would be no sports. Period. No money from TV. No money from sponsors. Nothing.

Wow, talk about ignorant. You really don't understand that without the big name schools, these kids would be making what the players from Williams, Trinity and Western Connecticut State University are making.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I don't need to ask, I know first hand. And it's not $100k. It's typically half that, and if you go in-state, it's closer to a third or less. Like I said, you're talking out of your arse. You uninformed, out of touch with reality, and mind-numbingly stupid. Your argument boils down to "because I say so", you have no logical argument for why an athlete shouldn't be allowed to earn revenue off of his value, while the school and NCAA, does.



This is epic. You keep saying they have no value other than what the "school allows" but then you acknowledge the fact these kids are getting paid BEFORE they even enter the school. That means they have value.

My God you're an idiot. There have been logical arguments against paying kids that I just disagree with. Yours is nothing like that. You ignore reality, make a statement as if it's fact, only to prove yourself wrong in the very next sentence. The player wouldn't have value without the school? False. That's why they're getting paid before they even commit to going to the schools. The opposite of your argument is what is true. Without the players, there would be no sports. Period. No money from TV. No money from sponsors. Nothing.

Read post from Kibblesanbits on this page. It pretty much says what I'm saying. Good luck with crowd support for these players in minor league hoops.

 

[RSTuthill]

Folks are aware, are they not, that the vast majority of CFB programs have negative net revenue once the debt service on the stadiums they play in and other unaccounted costs are included, right?

 

[metsfan2323]

Players getting paid just makes me want to see UCONN drop to the FCS level. North Dakota State fans seem to be having fun and that school probably isn't losing 30 million a year. I bet a lot of schools would drop out if a professional model were adopted so we would be in good company.

 

[BlueMAB]

Wow, talk about ignorant. You really don't understand that without the big name schools, these kids would be making what the players from Williams, Trinity and Western Connecticut State University are making.

And you don't understand that without the players, there would be no big name schools. You have the IQ of a dead fish. You argued that HS players have no value, while talking about the money HS players get in the same post. Moron.

If the players needed the schools more than the schools needed the players then scholarships wouldn't exist.

If the players had zero value without the schools, then the schools wouldn't risk forfeiting games, scholarships, and financial penalties by facilitating payments to the players and regularly violating NCAA rules.

 

[kibblesnbits]

If the players had zero value without the schools, then the schools wouldn't risk forfeiting games, scholarships, and financial penalties by facilitating payments to the players and regularly violating NCAA rules.

That doesn’t logically follow. They are paying because some schools have created great value by establishing a following for the football program at dear old State U. That following depends on winning so they have created competition amongst schools for players. That does not mean that if Alabama and Auburn were suddenly hit with the death penalty that those same fans would be lining up to buy tickets to a game between the Birmingham Barons and Montgomery Muskrats of the Junior NFL developmental league. Most of the value is created by the fans emotional attachment to the schools.

In short, just because there is a great amount of money associated with college football (with a large percentage of programs still losing money),does not mean there would be a lot of money for players if CFB didn’t exist.

If college football ever dies it won’t but there may be big changes relative to the current system), fans in the south will shift to Saturday church services so they can go to the high school game on Friday night (making it more of a religious pilgrimage than it already is) and fire up the 60” TV in their double wide to watch the NFL on Sunday. They’d even be able to catch the London games that used to overlap with Sunday morning services.

 

[BlueMAB]

That doesn’t logically follow. They are paying because some schools have created great value by establishing a following for the football program at dear old State U. That following depends on winning so they have created competition amongst schools for players. That does not mean that if Alabama and Auburn were suddenly hit with the death penalty that those same fans would be lining up to buy tickets to a game between the Birmingham Barons and Montgomery Muskrats of the Junior NFL developmental league. Most of the value is created by the fans emotional attachment to the schools.

In short, just because there is a great amount of money associated with college football (with a large percentage of programs still losing money),does not mean there would be a lot of money for players if CFB didn’t exist.

If college football ever dies it won’t but there may be big changes relative to the current system), fans in the south will shift to Saturday church services so they can go to the high school game on Friday night (making it more of a religious pilgrimage than it already is) and fire up the 60” TV in their double wide to watch the NFL on Sunday. They’d even be able to catch the London games that used to overlap with Sunday morning services.

Of course it follows, you just refuse to acknowledge the fact the players are the literally the only ones are irreplaceable. When Saban retires, people will still follow Alabama.

So Arizona facilitated a $100k payment to a recruit because their fans had nothing better to do after going to church?

 

[kibblesnbits]

You keep making up your own straw men. The point is that the value you cite is created by the presence of college sports. Arizona isn’t paying the kid to steal him away from the G-League. If there was no college system, most of these kids would get nothing for their skills, certainly not the 10,000 or so with football scholarships or the more than 3,000 for basketball. You might have a dozen per year to the NBA and perhaps 100 or so new entries making a basic G-League salary that is roughly the same in value as a scholarship.

[Edit: To prove my point, basic G-League salaries are $20k-$26K per year, which is actually much less than the value of a college scholarship. In the absence of a college option, only the top handful of players that can make an NBA roster out of high school will do better than that. The next tier, say top 50-100 per year would make measly G-League wages. The rest will play for free in summer leagues and try to figure out how to pay tuition at the local community college.]

Saying players are the only thing that is irreplaceable is absurd when 100% of rosters turn over every 4-5 years. Did Clemson fans stop watching when Deshaun Watson left or did they move on to rooting for his replacement?

If we are going to pay athletes as employees then we should also demand the programs pay for themselves. No more having taxpayers and other students subsidize what is effectively a minor league team.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

And you don't understand that without the players, there would be no big name schools. You have the IQ of a dead fish. You argued that HS players have no value, while talking about the money HS players get in the same post. Moron.

If the players needed the schools more than the schools needed the players then scholarships wouldn't exist.

If the players had zero value without the schools, then the schools wouldn't risk forfeiting games, scholarships, and financial penalties by facilitating payments to the players and regularly violating NCAA rules.

Keep dreaming. Very limited understanding difference between the beginnings and evolution of pro sports and college sports.

 

[weyuo]

Maybe $100,000 is high, but ask any family trying to put a kid through college (room and board) how much it costs and how valuable a full schoarship would be to them.

How much did Crozier and his family have to poney up for his multiple injuries plus rehab? I don't think it cost them a penny out of pocket. Now how much would that same state of the art health care cost any of us? Include free education, meals, transportation, tutoring, housing. Yeah I'd say it's got to be around $100K.

 

[BlueMAB]

There is no logical argument against allowing the kids to earn money off their likeness, and their value. i've said repeatedly the school doesn't have to be the one paying the players, but that they should be allowed to earn their own income off their likeness. The argument against letting players earn their own income stinks of some combination of racism, elitism, jealousy, or all of the above. It wouldn't cost the school anything to allow Jalen Adams to get paid for signing paraphernalia fans buy from UConn, or for making paid appearances. It doesn't violate Title IX and it doesn't increase the university's expenses.

 

[metsfan2323]

There is no logical argument against allowing the kids to earn money off their likeness, and their value. i've said repeatedly the school doesn't have to be the one paying the players, but that they should be allowed to earn their own income off their likeness. The argument against letting players earn their own income stinks of some combination of racism, elitism, jealousy, or all of the above. It wouldn't cost the school anything to allow Jalen Adams to get paid for signing paraphernalia fans buy from UConn, or for making paid appearances. It doesn't violate Title IX and it doesn't increase the university's expenses.

You do realize that there is nothing stopping players from making money off of their likeness as soon as they are done playing amateur sports.

Here's an idea for you, Get a bunch of former UCONN players, both men and women and travel the state giving autograph shows. I'm sure you will all get rich, and there is literally nothing stopping you from doing it. Have fun! Report back to us and tell us how it turns out.

BTW in 1996 I paid $20 for the opportunity to stand in front of Jim Calhoun and get his autograph. The sign said the money was going to a charity Jim supported. It was a pleasure meeting JC and I will never forget it. I promise you, if the sign didn't say the money was going to charity I wouldn't have done it.

Maybe now you begin to understand a little that as soon as you turn UCONN athletics into professional sports teams the money will dry up, and it has nothing to do with racism or elitism. People buy tickets and make donations in large part because they want to support the school, It's very much like giving money to charity. I support the name on the front of the uniform, not the back.

 

[BlueMAB]

You do realize that there is nothing stopping players from making money off of their likeness as soon as they are done playing amateur sports.

Here's an idea for you, Get a bunch of former UCONN players, both men and women and travel the state giving autograph shows. I'm sure you will all get rich, and there is literally nothing stopping you from doing it. Have fun! Report back to us and tell us how it turns out.

BTW in 1996 I paid $20 for the opportunity to stand in front of Jim Calhoun and get his autograph. The sign said the money was going to a charity Jim supported. It was a pleasure meeting JC and I will never forget it. I promise you, if the sign didn't say the money was going to charity I wouldn't have done it.

Maybe now you begin to understand a little that as soon as you turn UCONN athletics into professional sports teams the money will dry up, and it has nothing to do with racism or elitism. People buy tickets and make donations in large part because they want to support the school, It's very much like giving money to charity. I support the name on the front of the uniform, not the back.

If they won't make any money, then why aren't they allowed to do it?

Jim made UConn a powerhouse, and UConn made Jim a multi-millionaire. There's no comparison there.

Also, YouTube didn't exist in 1996, and one player has already lost his eligibility for monetizing his channel.

Other than that, great post.