In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 230
Online now 223 Record: 4649 (2/27/2012)
The place for inside information on the Iowa Hawkeyes
The place to discuss general topics outside of Iowa
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I know this sounds crazy and would never happen. But just pretend with me for a minute. What kind of system would even the playing field for more teams? Maybe something like certain pay levels for recruits? So say you could only offer say like 5 players the top $75k salary or whatever. Then 5 more the next lowest level of $60k or whatever and so on. How would money influence recruiting if it were legal? Would it even matter?
If the question is "what kind of system would level the playing field", then instead of money, how about a regressive scholarship system based on the final top 25 poll each year.
If a team finishes the season as the national champion, they get are able to sign one scholarship player the following spring. Number two gets to sign two scholarship players, etc., etc.
Some players are already getting the money, so might as well look at a different angle!
One big key would be whether they could adequately police it, because once you open up that can of worms, there's no telling how far it can go. But assuming it could be policed, that would literally force schools to put their money where their mouth is. In other words, you say this kid is your top running back on the board? Then you need to offer him more than every other back. It could help schools like Iowa land a recruit that schools such as Texas want, because Texas may have a particular player 12th on its board, while that same player might be 2nd on Iowa's board.
Very interesting topic. How do you envision the system looking?
Where a salary cap is really needed is for the coaches and the spending on facilities. If coaches' salaries were reigned in, then schools could afford to pay a small ($300/month) stipend to all scholarship athletes in DI.
I imagine it will stay how it is. Or if they do pay the players it will be like a small even amount to everyone. But I would like to see something to even out the playing field if they do end up paying players some day. I just don't know if that would be possible or how it would work.
That's another interesting concept, and would likely lead to more coaching stability at each school.
Sorry for the confusing question. What I meant by that was how do you envision the system working if there's a salary cap for the players?
They can already afford this
85 kids on schollie gets 300 month = 300,000 dollars. If you can't afford an extra 300,000 dollars as a program you need to drop down another division
Also disagree on paying all student athletes a stipend. Only student athletes that belong to cash producing sports should get this stipend. Why should our football teams success pay for our rowing teams beer money?
This post was edited by fuisu 14 months ago
ok so the kid that gets a free scholly to play fb - and turns out he sucks as a kicker - still gets the 300/mo
and the wrestler that wins 4 ncaa titles gets no money (i suppose food money should not be an issue here)
Wrestling owns the Olympics
Wrestlers pay bills dude, they pack the house. They can have one.
I'm pretty fine with Harvard paying their rowing team a stipend but I'm going to be pist if our rowing team gets one. Our soccer team? Come on.
The only thing I like about the idea of super conferences is: they leave the NCAA and become their own entity.
lol - don't you sleep?
so now it is a school to school decision? another can with more worms.
I believe rowing would be greater if they actually used some hand to hand combat during the event - and it would sell more tickets and the tv revenue could pay for it all.
From being a student/athlete back in the early 90s and playing college football on scholarship, I don't agree with paying players a salary.
I had a scholarship and looked at it as a way to pay for my education, food, and living. I balanced football with school, and I worked part time during the off season for extra money.
While there is are a small percentage of players who will go pro, most will use their education towards their career path. The money that football brings in goes towards other sports and programs for a college/university.
Players are getting paid by their scholarship for a free education (which now days is worth $50,000+ at many schools, food, and a place to live. That alone should be enough pay.
I am not in favor of paying players any more.
I agree with you in principle, but because of Title IX, I don't think it'd ever happen in practice. If they pay one athlete in one sport, I think they'll have to pay every (scholarship) athlete in every sport.
You bring up a great point here. It seems that the popular line to use is that "these athletes generate millions of dollars for the school, and they don't see a dime of it." As you alluded to, everything is paid for, whereas a lot of regular students end up spending years paying off their students loans. I wouldn't be totally opposed to athletes being officially paid, but I do think we all need to keep in mind the financial benefits (full tuition, books, housing, per diem, etc.) they're already being compensated with.
The other thing to keep in mind is full scholarship athletes already get around $1,000 stipend every month.
Stipend - $1000
Ave Rent - $350
Utilities - $100
Food (Non-Dinner) - $250
Those are pretty average numbers, I think, which would leave around 300 extra dollars... How much more do people think we should get them?
This. I am OK with a small monthly stipend. Most of these athletes have year-round commitments and can't work. The poor ones need to have some money for gas, extra food and an occasional date. $50 to $75 a week would cover that. It would help remove temptation (although not all - some players are going to abuse the rules no matter how much they get paid).
they already get the small monthly stipend....
Really - didn't know that. Is that in addition to regular meals at the training table?
Yep. They're not getting rich off of it, but it's enough to get by on if they stick to a budget.
yes, like i said, its around 1K per month, was a little over 900 in 2009.
So, they get $1,000 per month, or about $200-$250 per week, on top of housing and food? If so, I have no sympathy for athletes crying that they are impoverished because they can't hold jobs while in school.
Nope, not exactly. When they live in the dorms they do not get anything. When the live off campus they get the 1K to pay for food, rent, etc.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports