Multi-year scholarship option approved by NCAA

[Carl Spackler]

I understand all of this. I'll tell you this. Take it for what you will. We clearly will disagree on this, and that's ok. THis is all hypothetical anyway.

I think there is time, to work, if a student wants to. If I had spent half the time I spent playing spades, going to Ted's, walking down to Carriage House and getting rowdy, or sleeping during the day each week that went by...if I had spent half that time studying, scheduling more classes, or working, I'd have either finished my degree much earlier, or been able to make a decent coin. I was a damn good spades player at one time.

Now, I'm not sure how things are now, because I know the program is a hell of alot different now, than it was then. Maybe you are absolutlely right, and that every minute of every day for these kids from 5:30am til 10:30pm is scripted.

I doubt it. Because you know what? The program is light years from where it was back in the day, but 18-22 year old football players, are still 18-22 year old football players. They lift, the go to class, they study, and they want to hang out and chase the tail. If a player can't find time to look at enough film? That means they're sleeping more than they should be sleeping, or doing something else more than they should be doing.

I'll say it again, for the kids out there, that need/want the extra spending money, I see no reason why they can't find themselves work on campus, and there is no need for scholarship athletes to get preferential treatment in hiring for campus jobs AND there are plenty of jobs that can be done for 10-12 hours a week around the athletic facilities, or elsewhere on campus. I see big problems going OFF campus.

All it would take is some dedicated effort and brain power to make it work.

Lastly, nowhere in any of this, did I say that coaches would be hiring players, I'd want the complete opposite. Caoches should have nothign to do with the hiring process. But I am saying that coaches can create student jobs in the athletic facilities, that anyone in the student body can apply for.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Stipend is a terrible idea in my book. Forgot to add that, again. If you provide a stipend for scholarship athletes, you need to provide stipends for not jsut every scholarhips athlete across all sports, but also to every student on campus.

 

[BlueMAB]

Stipend is a terrible idea in my book. Forgot to add that, again. If you provide a stipend for scholarship athletes, you need to provide stipends for not jsut every scholarhips athlete across all sports, but also to every student on campus.

Where in the world do you get that idea from?

 

[BlueMAB]

Caoches should have nothign to do with the hiring process. But I am saying that coaches can create student jobs in the athletic facilities, that anyone in the student body can apply for.

Right, that will happen. Jim Calhoun will have no say at all over which of his players are "hired" to "cut game film", and athletes will not get preferential treatment for those jobs over the rest of the student body.

I admire your endless optimism but your idealism on this issue ignores the fact you open up the door for minor and major NCAA violations. I would be stunned if the NCAA allowed athletes to work jobs that are strikingly similar to film study sessions with coaches.

 

[Carl Spackler]

All of this is meaningless and hypothetical. It's not happening, so don't get worked up about it. The stipend is not going to happen, the multi-year scholarships are already in place. As for a stipend, the most important question, is what is the money in a stipend for? Once you answer that question, the issue of a stipend gets pretty clear.

I am against stipends. I am in favor of scholarship athletes being able to work for a paycheck, if they so desire. I think it would be much easier to manage on campus than off - working.

I think multi-year scholarship option, as well as the traditional single year renewal, is fantastic, for both recruits, and for UConn, and I hope we use it smartly.

I've said all I'm going to say on this. Really.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You know, I will add more, just in case, because I can never stop, and you actually sound like somebody who might actually know a guy, who knows a guy....and can pass along info.

If a scholarship athlete is trully in need of cash spending money for travel expenses to get home, for whatever.....they're not going to get hung out dry. There are means available. All you need to do is talk to your coaches and get into the athletic offices and ask questions.

There are things called Pell Grants, and other kinds of specific funds set up for NCAA division 1 athletes, that have existed for many years, where you can get money awarded by applying and demonstrating the need basis. The key, being able to demonstrate the need. There's no reason why a scholarship kid, that wants to get home to a far away place from where they are going to school, but can't afford travel expenses for example, can't go through the process that exists, and have that money made available to them.

As for the stipend thing, again, it all goes back to answering the question - what is that money for? I'm against it.

 

[cu73etr]

Doesn't the Pell grant and other forms of financial aid go against the athletic grant in aid??

 

[Carl Spackler]

Doesn't the Pell grant and other forms of financial aid go against the athletic grant in aid??

Good question. I'm not an academic, athletic, of financial aid advisor. I don't know. I don't know everything you know.

I know that scholarships have to be funded. There is money that exchanges hands in a paper trail internally in a university. How grants and/or work related income money all effects that, is a matter for the people that deal with it. I don't have enough room in my brain to keep track of that stuff.

I do know, that if a kid really needs spending money, and can't work, there are options available. That was my point, in continuing this discussion, becuase it wasn't mentioned before.

I am against the stipend. Last thing you need is to start cutting checks to students that they cash on their way to the bar.

The kids that trully need money, have options available to them. Are they good options? Yes, no, maybe so. That's the place to go though, and route to go, building and improving those things, and making work/job income available, rather than simply starting to cut checks to scholarship athletes.

 

[Jerry27]

Boy - I'd love to see the list of yea's vs. nay's in this one.

So, universities now have the option of offering single year or 2, 3 or 4 year scholaships to athletes.

That should make the recruiting world a little more interesting.

Going back to the OP question, here is a link to an article naming the schools from the BCS conferences who voted for it.

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/24156338/34949199

 

[J187Money]

Good question. I'm not an academic, athletic, of financial aid advisor. I don't know. I don't know everything you know.

I know that scholarships have to be funded. There is money that exchanges hands in a paper trail internally in a university. How grants and/or work related income money all effects that, is a matter for the people that deal with it. I don't have enough room in my brain to keep track of that stuff.

I do know, that if a kid really needs spending money, and can't work, there are options available. That was my point, in continuing this discussion, becuase it wasn't mentioned before.

I am against the stipend. Last thing you need is to start cutting checks to students that they cash on their way to the bar.

The kids that trully need money, have options available to them. Are they good options? Yes, no, maybe so. That's the place to go though, and route to go, building and improving those things, and making work/job income available, rather than simply starting to cut checks to scholarship athletes.

Carl, I'm with you in theory...just not in real life. The process is complicated enough...stipends are easy (even if not the best way to deal with it).

 

[J187Money]

And maybe, just maybe, the next time the school gets a $2/3M bump due to a new TV contract, it doesn't all automatically accrue to the head coach (who, last time I checked...isn't putting his body and future on the line every time out).