University of Texas to pay athletes of revenue sports $10,000 a year.

**Tyche** · 2014-10-23 13:56

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/col...ayer-10000.ece

Assuming the new policies survive the legal appeals process, Patterson said UT won’t have problems paying the extra $6 million to its players. That money will break down to about $10,000 for each player. The money will cover college expenses that aren’t covered by a traditional full scholarship and give each player $5,000 in compensation for the university’s use of his image.

Not anything imminent due to appeals, but it's the first time I've seen actual numbers thrown around.

**Cutriss** · 2014-10-23 14:14

I have a feeling this is going to end up being the most slippery slope ever.

Start paying them...but then they're going to get nickel-and-dime'd on every fucking thing out there that the team gives them for free now.

**Tyche** · 2014-10-23 14:21

Originally Posted by Cutriss

I have a feeling this is going to end up being the most slippery slope ever.

Start paying them...but then they're going to get nickel-and-dime'd on every fucking thing out there that the team gives them for free now.

Apparel companies would never charge them for those types of things. They spend hundreds of millions on licensing deals with universities.

**Obsidian** · 2014-10-23 14:28

I'm kind of confused as to how players believe they should be entitled to compensation beyond their already free ride through school.

**tyven** · 2014-10-23 14:30

wow i could have lived like a king in college off 10k/yr

**Cutriss** · 2014-10-23 14:44

Originally Posted by Obsidian

I'm kind of confused as to how players believe they should be entitled to compensation beyond their already free ride through school.

I started to type a big long thing here and then just gave up. This is not a difficult question to answer and asking it makes it seem like you're willfully ignoring it.

**Tyche** · 2014-10-23 15:12

Originally Posted by Obsidian

I'm kind of confused as to how players believe they should be entitled to compensation beyond their already free ride through school.

You should probably read more into the issue, as you've likely done little research on it if you think it's as simple as your comment conveys.

**kuronosan** · 2014-10-23 15:14

Originally Posted by Obsidian

I'm kind of confused as to how players believe they should be entitled to compensation beyond their already free ride through school.

This comment is so laden with ignorance and stupidity, I'm surprised the forum didn't delete it immediately after you posted it.

**Serra** · 2014-10-23 15:59

Revenue sports.. So Football and Basketball? Maybe Baseball?

**Dimmauk** · 2014-10-23 16:11

Didn't read shit, but are they paying other college sports too? I wonder if they will pay based on how much that sport brings in? Duke lacrosse team about to get paid!

**Tyche** · 2014-10-23 16:17

Originally Posted by Dimmauk

Didn't read shit, but are they paying other college sports too? I wonder if they will pay based on how much that sport brings in? Duke lacrosse team about to get paid!

Looks like just revenue producing sports. If it happens like this, hopefully the Olympic sport athletes are able to function like other scholarship students and make money as they wish.

**Bregor** · 2014-10-23 17:16

Originally Posted by Serra

Revenue sports.. So Football and Basketball? Maybe Baseball?

Cheerleading.

**Ksandra** · 2014-10-23 17:22

Originally Posted by Bregor

Cheerleading.

No snark: does competitive cheerleading bring in any revenue? I have always wondered about that.

I am super happy about this. Hopefully it will spread.

**Bregor** · 2014-10-23 17:26

Originally Posted by Ksandra

No snark: does competitive cheerleading bring in any revenue? I have always wondered about that.

No I was being cheeky, this is pretty much going to be only for football and basketball because of TV contracts and stadium revenue.

**Serra** · 2014-10-23 17:45

Yeah, I don't think any women's sports bring in revenue. Texas has had really good volleyball teams, so if any women's sport had a chance of being profitable, that'd be it.

**Plow** · 2014-10-23 18:00

Originally Posted by Obsidian

I'm kind of confused as to how players believe they should be entitled to compensation beyond their already free ride through school.

Because the players bring in billions nationwide and the "free ride" through school involves huge amounts of work and does not remotely compensate for the income they create for the schools.

Further, the big sports now have unreasonable agreements between the NCAA and professional organizations (NFL/NBA) that prohibit the players from eschewing college entirely and simply going on to make the money immediately.

**Mellema** · 2014-10-23 18:14

Originally Posted by Serra

Yeah, I don't think any women's sports bring in revenue. Texas has had really good volleyball teams, so if any women's sport had a chance of being profitable, that'd be it.

UT's women's basketball has a huge following. Baylor's Women's basketball has been big lately also, but now that Griner is gone I'm not sure how that will be.

**notorious bum** · 2014-10-23 18:52

Idk about yall, but the cheerleaders and marching bands are major contributors to why college football is fucking awesome. Those chicks bust major ass(unavoidable) and often have more creative talent than pro sports counterparts. NFL needs to give up the slave wage for cheerleaders, to start off.

**Anoat** · 2014-10-23 19:14

The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. We've already started down that direction when even the NCAA is referring to "Power Five" conferences. This will be all about football and men's basketball. In some northern schools, I know ice hockey does really well. I can't think of any women's program that will be able to bring in money consistently. Maybe Connecticut or Tennessee basketball?

**Obsidian** · 2014-10-23 19:32

Originally Posted by Cutriss

I started to type a big long thing here and then just gave up. This is not a difficult question to answer and asking it makes it seem like you're willfully ignoring it.

Ignorant? Yes, because college sports is not a business in Canada and this is honestly probably the first time I've heard of or looked into the big stink surrounding the issue. I asked because there is clearly something I am not aware of that makes a compelling case for them that extends beyond "they work hard and the schools make a lot of money," because normal students have to work hard too (or go into crippling debt, I guess) and schools should be trying to make money to avoid inflating tuition fees. I thought I might save myself the hassle of sifting through dozens of bullshit HuffPo "articles", tumblr tripe, and blogspam garbage by asking here first. If the question came across as disrespectful or condescending, it was unintentional. I was legitimately interested in an actual answer.

Regardless, I did some light reading over my break. It seems one of the main points of contention is that universities make boatloads of money. This in itself is not satisfactory justification, to me, because that money should be reinvested in the school to the benefit of everybody. It is not, it seems, working out that way, but I am as yet unconvinced that paying athletes is the best solution to that problem. There are other student faculties that contribute to the reputation and financial benefit of a university (engineering teams, research teams, and what have you) whom this would not aid, and who put in just as much effort as athletes. And who would be eligible for payment? Would athletes in less profitable disciplines get paid despite not bringing in money?

Forced absence from class is something I find more agreeable but perhaps the better solution is to fix scheduling? Likely not feasible, and they are, in essence, being deprived of what compensation the school does currently provide them, so maybe paying them for this reason is reasonable. Injuries are kind of the same deal; they probably end up missing classes due to those injuries.

I think that players should absolutely be paid for their appearances in video games and that doesn't seem to be happening. I would ask if anyone understands why the NCAA prevents players from allowing their likeness to be used for promotional purposes or from accepting sponsorships, but I'm leery of doing so based on the responses I've already gotten.

Ultimately, based on my preliminary reading it seems to me that the financial situation surrounding college sports is in need of attention (and the NCAA likely requires significant restructuring/refocusing), but I think it may be that the solution lies in more clearly defining and mandating what schools spend/reinvest their money on, rather than giving more money to athletes.

Originally Posted by Plow

Further, the big sports now have unreasonable agreements between the NCAA and professional organizations (NFL/NBA) that prohibit the players from eschewing college entirely and simply going on to make the money immediately.

This is absolutely wrong, but is the best solution to pay college athletes, or abolish these agreements?

Thread: University of Texas to pay athletes of revenue sports $10,000 a year.

Thread Tools

University of Texas to pay athletes of revenue sports $10,000 a year.

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads