Jay Paterno on paying players

[laservet]

State College, PA - Jay Paterno: Pay Student-Athletes? They're Already Getting a Great Deal

 

[PANDFAN]

LOVE IT! sick and tired of this whole paying them!!!!

 

[koonja]

I'm all for NOT paying players. It's nice to see someone break it down into a numbers game and show what a great deal free education really is. I'm graduating with about 43,000 in student loans. I can't imagine how awesome it'd feel to graduate debt free.

 

[irish1958]

Excellent.
And he didn't point out that the overwhelming majority of players don't have the ability to go on into the MBA or NFL.
Also, the majority don't even earn a starting position on the team.

 

[irishpat183]

Great read!

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

alot of these kids have problems at home, priorities are not the same. the system is flawed. no easy answer poeple.

 

[Irish2015]

Wow i usually hate everything that comes out of Happy Valley but this is a excellent read.

 

[IrishLax]

alot of these kids have problems at home, priorities are not the same. the system is flawed. no easy answer poeple.

Then don't go to college. Seriously, if you have no interest in an education and don't feel like it fits your priorities... don't go. There are thousands of other people right behind you in line that would LOVE to get a free education AND have the honor of playing a sport.

The only fair argument to players getting paid, in my opinion, is that in a free market system some kids would get money. On that note, you're 100% correct that the system is flawed and that there is no easy solution.

 

[mgriff]

I think the free education is adequate, but I vehemetly disagree with the amount of money being made at the student-athlete's expense. It's not modern day slavery, but a free education compared to what they could be making in a market system are not even remotely comparable. I just hate seeing people do the work and fat cats profiting at the top. There will always be alternative payment programs until the athletes are compensated, but then they'll no longer be student-athletes. It's so complicated, this issue would take a summit of leadership countless hours to iron out. I cannot even begin to fathom the depth...

 

[IrishLax]

I think the free education is adequate, but I vehemetly disagree with the amount of money being made at the student-athlete's expense. It's not modern day slavery, but a free education compared to what they could be making in a market system are not even remotely comparable. I just hate seeing people do the work and fat cats profiting at the top. There will always be alternative payment programs until the athletes are compensated, but then they'll no longer be student-athletes. It's so complicated, this issue would take a summit of leadership countless hours to iron out. I cannot even begin to fathom the depth...

I think it's important to discuss who the "fat cats" are.

The school? No, all of the staff at the school are going to get paid regardless. And the money goes to fund all of the other programs... which most schools can't even do and stay in the black. Hell, California just cut their baseball team among other programs because they'd couldn't afford them... but luckily they got ~$10mil in donations and could reinstate them. If you paid football/basketball players the only people in the school affected would be those that played other sports... and you'd basically have to abolish/greatly amend Title IX to be able to pay men in the first place... so you'd see very, very few women's programs... and the ones that you did would have sparse funding nowhere near the funding of programs today. In a free market system you'd see basketball, football and a spattering of other sports with practically no women's athletics.

The NCAA? Again, they are going to make their money no matter what set of rules the game is played under. They make enough to employ their staff (and for what it's worth... people at the NCAA aren't exactly eating caviar and buying yachts... they're normal people making a normal wage and the NCAA itself makes no profits) and run championships. They have nothing to gain by keeping things the way they are... if they actually decided to allow pay and become a for-profit organization focused on basketball/football they would make loads of cash and you would actually have some "fat cats."

The coaches? Arguably, it's pretty crazy that they can make millions (for certain sports) while players can't make a dime. This is worth looking at.

The video game companies? In a lot of ways, these are the fattest of the fatties in the sense that they are profiting off of the likeness of players without having and hand in their product on the field or in the class room. They are also the only organization that is truly making a profit. Schools and the NCAA are operating somewhere in the ballpark of non-profit or losing money overall. EA Sports is not. This should be taken a look at.

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

Then don't go to college. Seriously, if you have no interest in an education and don't feel like it fits your priorities... don't go. There are thousands of other people right behind you in line that would LOVE to get a free education AND have the honor of playing a sport.

The only fair argument to players getting paid, in my opinion, is that in a free market system some kids would get mo
ney. On that note, you're 100% correct that the system is flawed and that there is no easy solution.[/QUOT

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

forget paying football players. anyone remember title IX? if you pay one team, you need to pay them ALL.

the only two teams (if any) at D1 schools who are profitable are basketball and/ or football. For example, Duke basketball didn't make money last year. And that's DUKE.

So when you start taking about all this, remember for every Left Tackle of Wide Receiver, there's a law that states you NEED to pay a girl's field hockey player or some nerd on the fencing team.

You wanna bankrupt a school? Do it. Fiscally, logistically, impossible

 

[Whiskeyjack]

domer_mq over at Her Loyal Sons posted an excellent article on this subject last week. Here's my response:

Excellent post and excellent comments. Here’s my quick take on the problem:

This all boils down to the fact that for the two most popular sports in America– basketball and football– the only semi-pro/ minor league system involves the NCAA.

If these kids played baseball, they’d have the option of entering the minors (or to get drafted if they’re good enough) straight out of high school. So, let’s compare what NCAA football players receive compared to what they’d make in a minor league.

I linked the top 20 colleges for return on investment. It lists the cost of a Notre Dame degree at $181,900; so our kids are being compensated in kind at roughly $45,475 annually. That’s a lot more than minor league baseball players make.

More importantly, the average 30-year-ROI on a ND degree is $1,384,000. So they’re effectively receiving an investment worth $181,900 in present-day value which will provide an annual return of 12%. That’s *damned good* compensation.

It’s worth noting that only 3% of college football players get drafted. So forget the bench v. starter distinction; this is a killer deal for 97% of players. On top of that, the average NFL career only lasts 3 years. So even for most of the drafted guys, it’s a really good deal.

The only students that might be getting “exploited” by the current system are the few super stars who end up leaving for the draft after their junior years anyway. So perhaps they were compensated at less than market rates for three years during a mandatory semi-pro portion of their careers. OMG! Blow up the system! Major injustice here!

And as for not having time for part-time/ summer jobs, it’s a red herring. If a student athlete is truly needy, there’s a ton of money available to cover the costs of laundry, food, etc.

And as Biscuit pointed out, they are completely free to take out a student loan of any size to cover whatever spending they feel is necessary. I took out an extra $10,000 during my senior year to help cover the costs of my wife’s engagement ring.

The above analysis doesn't even attempt to value all the fringe benefits football players receive as well. The vast majority of them are getting an awesome deal.

 

[UPMich_NDfan]

Corrupt kids/parents are going to be corrupt, give em' $100 a month they'll want a $1,000. Give them $1,000 a month they'll want $3,000...paying them would not fix the problem you are seeing...they'll just want more.

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

boy let's blame the kids and the parents.

 

[kmoose]

boy let's blame the kids and the parents.

Why not? Aren't they a part of the problem? Just because you are the "David" (parents and kids) to some "Goliath" (The schools and/or NCAA), that doesn't make you some kind of can do no wrong "Saint". Shielding the kids/parents from any blame just perpetuates the sense of entitlement in these kids that has created many of these problems.

 

[irishpat183]

boy let's blame the kids and the parents.

I absolutely agree that they share in this problem with unreasonable expectations for their kid and not putting enough emphasis on the importance of the free education they're getting. How could you NOT blame them??

Shopping their kid around like prostitutes....Newtons dad for an example. You don't think that happens everywhere else??

I say if you pay the players(which I'm 100% against), make them pay it back when they graduate. Like a loan. So if they go on to make millions, they can pay it back...if they don't succeed in the NFL, they must pay back the education that they either wasted or used.

Fair is fair. It's not the NCAA's fault that Johnny didn't care about going to class because he was a football star.

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

Why not? Aren't they a part of the problem? Just because you are the "David" (parents and kids) to some "Goliath" (The schools and/or NCAA), that doesn't make you some kind of can do no wrong "Saint". Shielding the kids/parents from any blame just perpetuates the sense of entitlement in these kids that has created many of these problems.

plenty of blame to go around, no real answers.

 

[ACamp1900]

I absolutely agree that they share in this problem with unreasonable expectations for their kid and not putting enough emphasis on the importance of the free education they're getting. How could you NOT blame them??

Shopping their kid around like prostitutes....Newtons dad for an example. You don't think that happens everywhere else??

I say if you pay the players(which I'm 100% against), make them pay it back when they graduate. Like a loan. So if they go on to make millions, they can pay it back...if they don't succeed in the NFL, they must pay back the education that they either wasted or used.

Fair is fair. It's not the NCAA's fault that Johnny didn't care about going to class because he was a football star.

I agree for the most part, but they can already do the highlighted... it's called student loans...

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

lets not forget most of these kids and parents are doing it right.

 

[ACamp1900]

lets not forget most of these kids and parents are doing it right.

and most are getting top educations that the parents and players don't have to pay for, just for playing a game... if that's 'exploited' then sign me up, my student loan payments are harsh.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

plenty of blame to go around, no real answers.

There's no need for "real answers" because the players aren't getting exploited. Take a look at my post on the previous page.

 

[mgriff]

Look at all the issues popping up in two threads. It will be almost impossible to sift through this to arrive at an adequate conclusion.

 

[BleedBlue&Gold]

There's no need for "real answers" because the players aren't getting exploited. Take a look at my post on the previous page.

sure put this in face of a player everytime a booster or an agent approaches them.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

sure put this in face of a player everytime a booster or an agent approaches them.

I didn't say the rules are all sensible and perfectly fair. There's certainly room for improvement in that area.

But to imply that athletes are getting exploited by their schools is laughable.

Laughable, man-- ha ha!

 

[Rocket89]

I work for a company that makes a lot of money, and I don't think I'm fairly compensated for my work.

Why isn't anyone helping me?

I think you really have to go Michael Moore on this issue to think that players are being exploited.

 

[irishpat183]

I agree for the most part, but they can already do the highlighted... it's called student loans...

But I'm talking about the athletes receiving schollys...make them pay it back if they don't graduate. Then they'll take the education part a whole lot more seriously.

 

[GO IRISH!!!]

domer_mq over at Her Loyal Sons posted an excellent article on this subject last week. Here's my response:



The above analysis doesn't even attempt to value all the fringe benefits football players receive as well. The vast majority of them are getting an awesome deal.

There is one main flaw in your argument comparing minor league baseball players and football/basketball players on full scholarships. Look at the hours spent by each player on their "job" duties. Now I know you will probably say the class and study hours are to the athlete's benefit. However, they need good grades to stay eligible so, in a way, it is part of their overall job description.

When I was playing, I once calculated that between class, studying, practice, meals (when you are an athlete, meals are not recreational, they serve a definite purpose) and other preparations in both school and sport, my average "work" day was easily 12 hours long and I regularly had 6 or 7 day work weeks. Even if you only calculate that out to the six months or so the athlete is participating competitively in their sport, your $45,575 annual income only comes out to roughly $26 an hour.

I would be willing to bet if you calculated the minor league salary, their hourly would be considerably higher. In addition to their salary, minor leaguers also have the option of other sources of income. Appearances, clinics, and things like that. College athletes are forbidden from having other sources of income.

Also looking at your points, put it in context of your job. How long would you be willing to work your tail off and defer your paycheck. One year? Two years? Four years? I am not saying paying athletes is the answer. I agree with posters above that there is no clear cut alternative. I just get a little worked up when people use the argument of the scholarship money/education as the primary reasoning against paying players. The hours these student athletes put in during the season (especially if they actually stick to the "student" part) is staggering. It is very, very hard work and there is a reasonable argument for payment.

Just my two cents.

 

[irishpat183]

I think some of you are trying to make this what it isn't...it's not a "job" is an audition for a job.

GO IRISH!!!- the argument of not paying players based on the benefits they receive through education and being a football player are very good reasons not to pay them. Let's not forget...its not the NCAA,Schools, Coaches fault if this kid decides he doesn't care about the education part. He doesn't take advantage of it?? Oh well. Don't come crying to me about not being compensated if you're flushing a 100k education down the toliet.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

There is one main flaw in your argument comparing minor league baseball players and football/basketball players on full scholarships. Look at the hours spent by each player on their "job" duties. Now I know you will probably say the class and study hours are to the athlete's benefit. However, they need good grades to stay eligible so, in a way, it is part of their overall job description.

Here's my point. The alternative to the current system is a concurrent minor league/ semi-pro system (which would incidentally ruin college football, but that's besides the point.) So when I hear complaints of exploitation, I look at minor league baseball because it provides us with a good guess of what a similar system might look like for basketball and football.

Here's what I found on compensation in minor league baseball:

Second, no one gets wealthy in the minors. Most baseball players do not make in a year as much as Cal Ripken makes for one game. In fact, most minor league players would love to make what I understand you pay your entry-level staffers. When I played rookie ball, although I was under contract for a year, I made $850 a month for 21/2 months. In double A, I made $1,350 a month, and in triple A I made $1,850 a month for 5 months. Clubhouse dues and tips cost roughly $1,500 for the season, leaving me about $7,500 before taxes. I have no idea how some of my friends who were married and had kids were able to make ends meet.

Even if you break that down into an hourly rate, I'm certain most Division I football players are getting a better deal; not to mention a safety net for the very likely possibility that they don't have a long and successful professional career after college.

When I was playing, I once calculated that between class, studying, practice, meals (when you are an athlete, meals are not recreational, they serve a definite purpose) and other preparations in both school and sport, my average "work" day was easily 12 hours long and I regularly had 6 or 7 day work weeks. Even if you only calculate that out to the six months or so the athlete is participating competitively in their sport, your $45,575 annual income only comes out to roughly $26 an hour.

That's not counting the additional income you've received since your playing days by virtue of having a college degree, and any fringe benefits you might have received.

I would be willing to bet if you calculated the minor league salary, their hourly would be considerably higher. In addition to their salary, minor leaguers also have the option of other sources of income. Appearances, clinics, and things like that. College athletes are forbidden from having other sources of income.

My limited research shows otherwise.

Also looking at your points, put it in context of your job. How long would you be willing to work your tail off and defer your paycheck. One year? Two years? Four years? I am not saying paying athletes is the answer. I agree with posters above that there is no clear cut alternative. I just get a little worked up when people use the argument of the scholarship money/education as the primary reasoning against paying players. The hours these student athletes put in during the season (especially if they actually stick to the "student" part) is staggering. It is very, very hard work and there is a reasonable argument for payment.

Even for most non-athletes, graduating from ND is "very very hard work", and they pay the university lots of money for that privilege.

"Deferred paychecks" are what college is all about; you give up four years of potential earnings and a lot of money in order to reap a higher salary/ standard of life down the road. A college degree is so valuable that I don't really see the logic in this argument.

I appreciate your reasoned response though.