Cheating Article - Good Read

[GophersInIowa]

The ONLY reason people deem paying players as so wrong is because the NCAA determined it was.

I don't believe that to be true with everyone. Many believe that college sports should be made up of amateur athletes. Many people donate to athletics, but won't do it if college sports turns into pro sports.

and in pretty much every aspect of life people get perks for being better at what they do than others.

Don't the great players get a pretty good perk after their college career is done?

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

anyone else getting the feeling that dpoll and disco are just agreeing angrily?

I agree..... but you're wrong!

 

[Pompous Elitist]

DPO, you're arguing with a Marxist.

There is an option for football players out of high school: the arena league. If players are serious about collecting a W-2 there is no reason they couldn't efect en masse to a private league. No such league exists for the reasons you've stated. Most college sports fans would continue to follow the "scabs" at the schools rather than a minor league, even if the players are more talented at said minor league. And, without major tv contracts the players would be paid relative peanuts, just like in the AFL. It's doubtful it would work. We've seen several minor leagues try and fail over the years.

 

[csom_1991]

I wrote it before - but, I would say that Minnesota should leave the B1G and become like the Ivy League or U of Chicago and either end football or eliminate athletic scholarships if they are forced to pay players.

Alternatively, they could eliminate athletic scholarships, meals plans, free workout facilities and tutoring, etc for athletes and simply give them a W2. Let the player cover these costs out of their salary. I think once taxpayers realize how much the average player is 'earning' - we would finally get the scrutiny that has been lacking all along. With that, I would make a requirement for all players to meet the same admission requirements as the bottom 15% of the student body. Lastly, the player contacts could be renewed/terminated at the whim of the player and school - and remove any caps on team size.

As to the conversations posted previously on a competing league to the NCAA - you cannot get around the fact that major college football has been heavily subsidized for generations with stadiums and other facilities that no other league could replicate - especially without the 100+ year legacy of most teams. As for the arena league/CFL, etc - the lack of big salaries for all of those leagues points to the market simply not being there for 'professional' football not played at the highest level. I don't think college faces the issue.

I honestly think that if college football cracked down on the cheating, etc and it was returned to only student athletes (which would exclude some of today's biggest stars) - attendance, etc would be unchanged for the NCAA overall. I honestly don't think you would have a large fall off in interest even at schools like Bama, tOSU, or Michigan. For most schools - they just want their team to be competitive - they go for the team, not a player. So, with a more level playing field, I think you could see expanded interest. So - my argument in a nutshell - major college football does not need to be at the highest level of play possible to capture fan interest as long as the playing field is seen as level.

 

[everybody knows my name]

That idea doesn’t hold up to any real scrutiny. Amateurism is essentially just a farce when it comes to the major sports as is. If you TRULY want amateurism then you’d be in favor of more severe caps on not just practice time but weight training and film study time. You’d be in favor of no road games during the week that would cause players to either miss class or have to travel at times that hamper their ability to be present for class and focused the next day. You’d also have to allow for players to make money the same as any other student which means that if someone else wants to pay them for whatever reason they could, just like literally every other student on campus. I don’t believe most people are TRULY ‘believers’ in amateur athletics, they are just fans of college sports the way they are and don’t want them to change because allowing players the freedom everyone else has turns it into every other capitalistic market where those that navigate it best will truly dominate. If Iowa’s boosters are willing to cut players checks for $50k and ours top out at $25K, we’ll never win that battle. Not only that but the mirage of amateurism (that really isn’t there) goes away and everyone has to accept that they’re basically watching semi pro ball which I guess kills the vibe for some even though they for some reason thought they were paying $50-$100 for seats to an amateur event.

You assume an awful lot about me, for someone I've never met.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I find it interesting that people view this stuff as so nefarious. The ONLY reason people deem paying players as so wrong is because the NCAA determined it was. Its not illegal, and in pretty much every aspect of life people get perks for being better at what they do than others. Somehow people view players being given cars to drive or some cash on the side as 'wrong' even though there's nothing really wrong about it beyond the fact that the NCAA said it was. Sure there's the argument that all parties agreed upon the rules before entering but that ignores the fact that there is basically no other alternative for a talented football player to benefit from that talent even though people with talent in areas other than athletics can benefit without cap or penalty all throughout their college years

So, let's say for the sake of argument that we throw out the rule book and let colleges compensate players as they see fit. I believe the inevitable outcome would be a fragmentation of college sports. The teams that would be willing to pay players (above or under the table) and had the financial means to do so would monopolize the top-end talent. Those teams would also attract the best TV deals. Teams that were not willing to "cheat" - or schools that lack the revenue to do so - would fall into the have-not category, and their games might wind up on public-access cable TV, or not. Deprived of the revenue needed to maintain their programs, these teams would likely have to cut back on scholarships, training table, etc. In essence, you might have 40 or 50 teams playing at the highest level, and everyone else playing at a level comparable to today's D2 or D3 programs.

So, under this scenario, a few players would reap the rewards of the new 'freedom,' and the vast majority of players would wind up worse off than they are under the current 'oppressive' system. Be careful what you wish for - you might not like the result.