Edsall Says Pay CFB Players

[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.