- 07/22/2010, 04:15PM ET
OregonTideFan said 07/22, 04:15 PM
The universities do NOT need to pay the players. The benefits/value of the college education is equal to or greater than the value that Football Players could earn on the Open Market.
Players at Alabama receive from the University a scholarship, room, board, and fees worth ~$46K for non-residents and ~$30K for residents. This does not include the value of the "football education" they receive. I am not sure what 1-on-1 training by Nick Saban on the techniques of playing defense is worth but my guess is his private camp would be really expensive. Also, the value of the education is considerably higher at Vandy, Stanford, USC, and Duke. Where the value would be ~$70K a year for just the school.
The UFL pays $35-$40K a year. The CFL pays for ~$50K a year. Many freshman could not make these teams that are filled with more mature ex major college players.
Any value monitary value created by college football is due to the University "brands" that bring the fans and boosters in year after year. Not the individual players.
Theatticfan.blogspot.com said 07/22, 07:01 PM
This cannot be true. You could make your argument about not all players are worthy of massive contracts can be used for any sport. Does Darko Milicic deserve $20 million to play 20 minutes a season in the NBA? Hell, no. But since the NBA makes so much money, it is only fair to give the ALL the players a fair share of the profit. The NCAA is arguably the second most popular league in the country only behind the NFL. You have games where more than 100,000 people show up.
You are saying the players are pouring their blood, sweat, and tears for nothing? You can say at that level they are playing for the love of the game. Sure, that may be true, but if someone (the NCAA) is making an absurd amount of money of this with endorsements and advertisments and what have you, the players deserve a fair share of the cut. Without the players, the universities and the NCAA makes no money whatsoever.
Saying that one player is worth as much as another is wrong. Is LeBron James worth the same as Carlos Arroyo? No. That is why one makes the minimum and one makes the maximium. Now I am not saying this should be instituted in the NCAA, but that is what you are saying if they were to be paid.
OregonTideFan said 07/23, 10:56 AM
Darko makes $7.5 Million a year, not because it is "his fair share". It is because that is what he is worth on the "Open Market" in the NBA. If the T-wolves didn't pay him that amount of money, (theoretically) someone else would. Colleges "pay" adequately (~$60K in benefits) as compared to their counter parts in the CFL/UFL (~$27K in cash).
It doesn't matter how much the "company" makes. It is the value of the skill of the employees. Does a guy taking out the trash in an expensive hotel make more than the one at a motel 6? NO! And sure players work hard, but so do farm workers and they get paid squat.
What makes the Difference between the revenue in College and the UFL? BRAND NAME! What makes the revenue difference between Boise State and Texas? BRAND NAME! It is the BRAND NAME that makes the money, not the players! And the Players are getting paid adequately already!
Theatticfan.blogspot.com said 07/23, 11:22 AM
Saying that farm workers are the same as football players is just straight wrong. Obviously farm workers work harder than football players, there is no question about that. But do farm workers have their jersey on sale while they work, and recieve no portion of the profits from that jersey.
No, they don't, and that is not just because farm workers do not wear jerseys. The reason is because they (the farmers) are not apart of the second biggest sports "league" in America, one that reaps the hard work of its employees by recieving the profits from their employees merchandise.
Can you stop comparing the UFL to college football? Hardly anyone gives a damn about the UFL or CFL. They are irrelevant in todays sporting world, a sporting world that revolves around professional and COLLEGIATE football. Your telling me college football is paid by "brand name" while the UFL isn't? THAT IS BECAUSE THE UFL HAS NO BRAND NAME. If the UFL was relevant at all in today's sports, the same argument would be brought up. It all goes back to the classic quesion, do you root for the players or the uniform?
OregonTideFan said 07/23, 12:56 PM
You are correct "No one cares about the UFL/CFL" because people won't pay to watch! But UFL/CFL have a products/players of similar quality to college but colleges make tons of money while the UFL/CFL struggle. The only explanation is that FANS CHEER FOR THE UNIFORMS NOT THE PLAYERS.
If Tim Tebow had transferred to Athens, Do you think Gator Fans would become UGa Fans? Do you think Tim Tebow leaving will change the number of fans at UF/FSU game? If you answered "yes" to either of these you know nothing about college fans or why people spend money to watch college football.
If people loved "minor league" football, the UFL/CFL would be raking in the cash. But they don't they love College Football. They love the campus, the students, being "home", the feeling of being young and cheering "their team" on to victory. That is worth $1K a ticket!
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia