Spurrier on player stipends: 'The money is there, and they bring it in'

[BleedGopher]

per CBS:

South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier has not been shy about his support for player stipends, enhanced scholarships, or other forms of compensation for football and men's basketball players. So when Tracy Wolfson asked him to touch on the topic during this week's edition of One2One, Spurrier was prepared to share some numbers on the spot.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...pends-the-money-is-there-and-they-bring-it-in

Go Gophers!!

 

[Fuzzy Rumpton]

Man I wish I could have gotten school paid for, a free ipad, tutors, meals, housing. Darn athletes have it so tough. It's such a shame that the schools don't add them to their payrolls. Guess they will have to take out loans like normal students if they need extra cash, what a shame.

 

[Coolew01]

per CBS:

South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier has not been shy about his support for player stipends, enhanced scholarships, or other forms of compensation for football and men's basketball players. So when Tracy Wolfson asked him to touch on the topic during this week's edition of One2One, Spurrier was prepared to share some numbers on the spot.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/eye-on-college-football/23349497/spurrier-on-stipends-the-money-is-there-and-they-bring-it-in

Go Gophers!!

Would you not have to pay an equal number of female athletes? From a Title IX perspective?

 

[AO54]

Would you not have to pay an equal number of female athletes? From a Title IX perspective?

From a title IX perspective there should be no discrimination on the basis of sex, therefore if the women's volleyball team generates huge profits, they should have the right to spend it on the women's volleyball team. The discrimination should only be made by where the money is being earned not which gender happens to be earning it.

 

[Coolew01]

From a title IX perspective there should be no discrimination on the basis of sex, therefore if the women's volleyball team generates huge profits, they should have the right to spend it on the women's volleyball team. The discrimination should only be made by where the money is being earned not which gender happens to be earning it.

I am far from an expert. Your analysis is likely 100 percent correct. I don't know, when you talk team vs a player, it almost seems like additional scholarship money. For the record I'm only playing devils advocate here because I believe legally it is how it is going to go down. Giving male athletes an extra $200 a month because they are (bringing in the revenue) doesn't fit the way society is set up. Sadly someone will sue and likely win the basis if discrimination. Please throw it in my face if in wrong. I agree with your position I don't think courts will though.

 

[Unregistered User]

Please throw it in my face...

That reminds me of...aww hell, I can't even write it.

 

[Coolew01]

That reminds me of...aww hell, I can't even write it.

Ever heard of the Spider Man? You l
ME especially don't want to.

 

[AO54]

I am far from an expert. Your analysis is likely 100 percent correct. I don't know, when you talk team vs a player, it almost seems like additional scholarship money. For the record I'm only playing devils advocate here because I believe legally it is how it is going to go down. Giving male athletes an extra $200 a month because they are (bringing in the revenue) doesn't fit the way society is set up. Sadly someone will sue and likely win the basis if discrimination. Please throw it in my face if in wrong. I agree with your position I don't think courts will though.

I'm no genius about the courts either, but they would have to rule the proportionality regulations violate the clear language of the law. The law is written in such a way that you should just be able to say we have one basketball team and either gender is welcome to try out, the same way the marching band is set up.

<script src="http://player.espn.com/player.js?playerBrandingId=4ef8000cbaf34c1687a7d9a26fe0e89e&adSetCode=91cDU6NuXTGKz3OdjOxFdAgJVtQcKJnI&pcode=1kNG061cgaoolOncv54OAO1ceO-I&width=576&height=324&externalId=espn:9607703&thruParam_espn-ui[autoPlay]=false&thruParam_espn-ui[playRelatedExternally]=true"></script>

 

[Costa Rican Gopher]

People seem to think if we paid the players a stipend that it would help solve the cheating/under-the-table payments, but it won't. If the NCAA says schools can pay players $2,000 a month (for example), it won't stop the payola because the same boosters will start paying more than that. Make it a ten thousand a month & someone will offer eleven thousand a month under-the-table. Someone is always going to offer more than whatever the rules allow.

Then what about player performance? Should a Freshman who's red-shirting get the same pay as the starting QB?

 

[Iceland12]

per CBS:

South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier has not been shy about his support for player stipends, enhanced scholarships, or other forms of compensation for football and men's basketball players. So when Tracy Wolfson asked him to touch on the topic during this week's edition of One2One, Spurrier was prepared to share some numbers on the spot.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...pends-the-money-is-there-and-they-bring-it-in

Go Gophers!!

What about ALL the non-rev sports, not just the Women's; though in a few schools Women's BB IS a revenue sport. Men's Hockey on the other hand is a revenue loser at most schools.

Spurrrier may be sincere. There would be a much larger pool of "Blue Chippers" for him to go after if a lot of schools opted-out, even after the Helmet Schools fill-up.

Here's one request, if the "Super Conference" does become real, they shouldn't be allowed to play any of those opt-out schools. Is the Major College Football world ready for a bleep-load of 2-10 to 5 - 7 teams?

 

[AO54]

People seem to think if we paid the players a stipend that it would help solve the cheating/under-the-table payments, but it won't. If the NCAA says schools can pay players $2,000 a month (for example), it won't stop the payola because the same boosters will start paying more than that. Make it a ten thousand a month & someone will offer eleven thousand a month under-the-table. Someone is always going to offer more than whatever the rules allow.

Then what about player performance? Should a Freshman who's red-shirting get the same pay as the starting QB?

Just imagine if everyone was paid according to their worth. The HORROR! Tom Brady making more money than Christian Ponder! Disgusting!

 

[lakesgopher]

Man I wish I could have gotten school paid for, a free ipad, tutors, meals, housing. Darn athletes have it so tough. It's such a shame that the schools don't add them to their payrolls. Guess they will have to take out loans like normal students if they need extra cash, what a shame.

This is a really stupid response!

 

[Fuzzy Rumpton]

This is a really stupid response!

Thanks

 

[lakesgopher]

Thanks

Anytime

 

[The Pope of Dinkytown]

Man I wish I could have gotten school paid for, a free ipad, tutors, meals, housing. Darn athletes have it so tough. It's such a shame that the schools don't add them to their payrolls. Guess they will have to take out loans like normal students if they need extra cash, what a shame.

You are right on the money, Fuzzy. We are talking about intercollegiate sports here and not the NFL's farm system.

 

[AO54]

You are right on the money, Fuzzy. We are talking about intercollegiate sports here and not the NFL's farm system.

We're talking about the Gophers of million dollar coaches and billion dollar tv contracts, not the hamline pipers.

 

[dpodoll68]

We're talking about the Gophers of million dollar coaches and billion dollar tv contracts, not the hamline pipers.

Why does it matter how much money the University or the coaches make? If the players want to make that money, they need to found a University or become a coach. No one's stopping them. By your logic, if secretary A and secretary B do the exact same job with the exact same responsibilities, and secretary A works at Microsoft while secretary B works at General Nanosystems, secretary A "deserves" to make more because Microsoft has lots and lots of money.

(P.S. All of the payola proponents look at the income of University athletic departments, but no one looks at the expenses. OK, fine, let's pay players. Then let's make them pay for their own helmets, pads, uniforms, food, tuition, pay the trainers, support staff, etc. Everything looks hunky-dory until you're the one who has to sign the front of the check.)

 

[AO54]

Why does it matter how much money the University or the coaches make? If the players want to make that money, they need to found a University or become a coach. No one's stopping them. By your logic, if secretary A and secretary B do the exact same job with the exact same responsibilities, and secretary A works at Microsoft while secretary B works at General Nanosystems, secretary A "deserves" to make more because Microsoft has lots and lots of money.

(P.S. All of the payola proponents look at the income of University athletic departments, but no one looks at the expenses. OK, fine, let's pay players. Then let's make them pay for their own helmets, pads, uniforms, food, tuition, pay the trainers, support staff, etc. Everything looks hunky-dory until you're the one who has to sign the front of the check.)

The microsoft secretary might need to have additional ability that the General nanosystems secretary doesn't have. The federal government also didn't mandate that the secretaries and engineers be paid the same as Title IX does with the football players and gymnasts.

We're signing all kinds of checks in order to upgrade the facilities just to attract a few more quality athletes. Norwood is signing checks as quickly as he can.

 

[dpodoll68]

The microsoft secretary might need to have additional ability that the General nanosystems secretary doesn't have.

No. I said that they have the exact same job with the exact same responsibilities. Pay attention.

The federal government also didn't mandate that the secretaries and engineers be paid the same as Title IX does with the football players and gymnasts.

And what does that have to do with how much money the University and/or football coach makes?

We're signing all kinds of checks in order to upgrade the facilities just to attract a few more quality athletes. Norwood is signing checks as quickly as he can.

And what does that have to do with the athletes paying for their own expenses?

 

[AO54]

No. I said that they have the exact same job with the exact same responsibilities. Pay attention.

But they don't have the same job. My logic was that the Gophers and Hamline are both college sports, but to compare the two jobs is silly. Your talent/ability has to be much greater to play/coach at the Gophers. They're worth more. People pay big money to see them. It's not currently a free market as Title IX regulations dictates they not be paid according to their ability, but it could be.

And what does that have to do with how much money the University and/or football coach makes?

Athletic departments would spend less on non-revenue sports and more on revenue sport players/coaches. You would have to just to be competitive in recruiting. Do I go to school A for tuition and an apartment, or school B for $150K?

And what does that have to do with the athletes paying for their own expenses?

It's got everything to do with Schools having all sorts of expenses with the explicit goal of recruiting players. How is your recruiting going to be when the players have to pay for their own equipment?

 

[dpodoll68]

It's not currently a free market as Title IX regulations dictates they not be paid according to their ability, but it could be.

Aside from all of the other nonsense you post, why do you keep bringing up Title IX in regards to paying college players? Title IX has nothing to do with whether or not players are paid. It would regulate pay if and when people get stupid and force the NCAA to pay players, but it has nothing to do with whether or not they get paid and really has zero bearing on the discussion.

 

[AO54]

Aside from all of the other nonsense you post, why do you keep bringing up Title IX in regards to paying college players? Title IX has nothing to do with whether or not players are paid. It would regulate pay if and when people get stupid and force the NCAA to pay players, but it has nothing to do with whether or not they get paid and really has zero bearing on the discussion.

How is it not worthwhile to consider the whole future system, rather than just whether or not they would be paid extra? Many people rightly bring up the fact that most schools, including the U spend their Football/Basketball profits entirely on the other sports with nothing left over to return to the general fund to pay teachers, etc. I think it should be the other way around. If a sport can't pay for itself, the money should flow from the general fund to that subsidized sport. Don't pretend that Football/Basketball isn't profitable by naming Volleyball and Tennis as part of their expenses.

 

[dpodoll68]

How is it not worthwhile to consider the whole future system, rather than just whether or not they would be paid extra? Many people rightly bring up the fact that most schools, including the U spend their Football/Basketball profits entirely on the other sports with nothing left over to return to the general fund to pay teachers, etc. I think it should be the other way around. If a sport can't pay for itself, the money should flow from the general fund to that subsidized sport. Don't pretend that Football/Basketball isn't profitable by naming Volleyball and Tennis as part of their expenses.

All of that is great. Again, it has nothing to do with whether or not players can/will/should get paid.

 

[Sportsfan24]

Here is my two cents:

The billions in revenue doesn't exist if it weren't for the athletes. Go get Johnny from the student body, line him up anywhere on the field and tell me how that works out.

My position is the athletes should not be paid tens of thousands but they should receive full ride scholarships. Scholarships should provide for room, board, school, entertainment (strippers), clothing and transportation to and from school. I'm thinking.....$1,000 a month?

 

[kellyleeks]

Here is my two cents:

The billions in revenue doesn't exist if it weren't for the athletes. Go get Johnny from the student body, line him up anywhere on the field and tell me how that works out.

My position is the athletes should not be paid tens of thousands but they should receive full ride scholarships. Scholarships should provide for room, board, school, entertainment (strippers), clothing and transportation to and from school. I'm thinking.....$1,000 a month?

So under your plan football players majoring in kinesiology would finally receive something of value?

 

[cncmin]

Here is my two cents:

The billions in revenue doesn't exist if it weren't for the athletes. Go get Johnny from the student body, line him up anywhere on the field and tell me how that works out.

My position is the athletes should not be paid tens of thousands but they should receive full ride scholarships. Scholarships should provide for room, board, school, entertainment (strippers), clothing and transportation to and from school. I'm thinking.....$1,000 a month?

Bring out that calculator. Type in $1,000, then hit the multiplication button (it's an X), then type in 12 and press the Enter or Calculate key. The value it spits out will be in the tens of thousands.