Voice of the Hawkeyes Board

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!

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.

That's another interesting concept, and would likely lead to more coaching stability at each school.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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).

Really - didn't know that. Is that in addition to regular meals at the training table?

yes, like i said, its around 1K per month, was a little over 900 in 2009.

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.