Big Ten considers pay proposal

[Mags FTW]

CHICAGO -- Big Ten officials discussed a proposal that would pay athletes to help cover living expenses on top of their scholarships during the league's spring meetings this week.

Big TenThe 2011 Big Ten spring meetings are in the books. ESPN.com's Brian Bennett and Adam Rittenberg take a look back at some nuggets coming out of the Palmer House. Blog

The idea, which is backed by current NCAA president Mark Emmert and was favored by late NCAA president Myles Brand, is to bridge the gap between what athletic scholarships pay and other expenses like transportation and clothing. That difference has been estimated at between $2,000 to $5,000 per player.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6564134

[Kerb Hohl]

A. Hilarious that they talk about this after O$U is going to get tagged hard.
B. O$U will just offer more money to lure players.

[PkrsBcksGphsMqt]

I've never been in favor of paying players. Major conference football and basketball players live like kings compared to the rest of the student body. I don't think there is any need to pay them beyond what they are receiving now. Paying them an extra $2,000-5,000 won't keep them from taking more money from agents either so that shouldn't be used as an argument for it.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

I've never been in favor of paying players. Major conference football and basketball players live like kings compared to the rest of the student body. I don't think there is any need to pay them beyond what they are receiving now. Paying them an extra $2,000-5,000 won't keep them from taking more money from agents either so that shouldn't be used as an argument for it.

My argument is why is it fair to deprive pay for players? Students are allowed to take amateur positions (internships) while a student. A lot of these players are planning on going pro and I look at them playing ball as an internship. They have to work hard 5 or 6 nights a week and can't take jobs. Let this be their job. I would allow the argument that their education is their pay if the NFL and NBA didn't have age limits. This forces them to go to college even if they don't have interest. I know there are flaws in my argument, but just another point of view.

[PkrsBcksGphsMqt]

I get what you are saying, but I just think major conference football and basketball players receive enough benefits, both during school and after, that they don't NEED to be paid. A couple of my friends are good friends with a prominent former Badger football player who didn't go pro. After he graduated (along with other senior football players that weren't going pro), he got to choose from a list of available jobs offered only to football players, by boosters and former players. He is now making very very very good money and he didn't have to do anything to get the job other than be a former Badger football player. Then there are all of the obvious benefits of being a player while at school too. I just think it's unnecessary and it won't stop agents from corrupting/using the student athletes.

[Mags FTW]

I've always said, just allow players to capitalize on their fame. If boosters want to give them money, let them do it. If a car dealership wants to pay them $1000 to come sign autographs, let 'em. If a sporting goods store wants to give them free clothes, let 'em.

If you go the proposed route, you're still going to have some problems. How much does each student get? Does the QB get as much as a women's hurdler even though she probably doesn't bring any money to the school?

[Kerb Hohl]

I always have flip-flopped on this matter.

Mags, no offense, but there are a lot of holes in that theory. I realize College Football is hardly a pure sport anymore, but I have no doubt that Terelle Pryor would have netted well over a million dollars per year to play at Ohio State all said and done. I had a pretty large collection of friends, roommates, guys in my dorm, etc. that were practice squad guys. I'm not saying those guys deserve some sort of priority, but they deserve consideration.

Now, Pryor is full of himself as it is, but how would the practice squad guys feel if Pryor drives up in a Beemer (bad example, he probably already does) with a clothing line or something like that out, and a personal assistant. Those guys wouldn't survive that ****. Something would give in that class-battle.

Plus, it would just turn into a bidding war and eventually turn into a fully professional sport. That may work well for football/basketball, but it would go sour in all others. Pryor would net $1.5 million per year and the women's tennis player would earn $15 for a handjob outside the courts. Is that fair? Probably in terms of how much one earns the university...but then you open up a whole other can of worms. Are you ready to pay a ton more when the universities just decide to outright funnel money to the boosters to pay the kids? You get the idea.

On the other hand, I think they should be paid. It's insane how much money these guys earn for the universities, sponsors, etc. I'll have the rest of my explanation tomorrow as I'm about to fall asleep on the keyboard.

[El Duderino]

I've always said, just allow players to capitalize on their fame. If boosters want to give them money, let them do it. If a car dealership wants to pay them $1000 to come sign autographs, let 'em. If a sporting goods store wants to give them free clothes, let 'em.

I understand the premise of that sounding fair, but recruiting would turn into battles of the boosters over near everything else.

Rich "friends of the program" would promise top recruits to do stuff like paying them 50,000 dollars for a signed jersey while another booster friend offered use of a new Escalade for a signed bubble gum wrapper. Schools lacking a bevy of rich boosters would be left out in the cold for higher quality recruits.

Hell, boosters still try finding ways to funnel money/gifts to players even with this being against the rules, but if this was made to not be an infraction, the floodgates would open and boosters would become the main recruiting tool for many universities, not the programs themselves.

If college sports want players to have access to at least some spending money since the kids can't really work, i'd prefer it came directly from the universities over the slimy world of boosters.

[Balls2TheWalls]

I think that the thing a lot of people forget about when discussing players deserving things is that they get to go to schools for free, and get educated for free. I think that the value of the scholarship has to be taken into account. Just because these players are looking to go pro, or because they are not willing to use their time in college to the fullest, does not mean that we should act like the amount of money that students with no spectacular athletic ability pay to go to these schools is moot. I think that if my tuition, housing, and food were all paid for by Purdue University when I went there that I would be thanking my lucky stars, not asking for more pay.