Horrible Recruiting Tactic by Charlie Weis

[Eaglesfan27]

Maybe this is inaccurate since I read it on a USC board, but they said that Beano Cook was on ESPN and he said that Weis's new policy is that if a kid commits to Notre Dame and then visits another school that his scholarship will be revoked. Seems like a horrible policy if true that will only hurt ND's recruiting efforts.

[Neuqua]

USC fan calling out ND for bad recruiting tactics?

:)

[Eaglesfan27]

USC fan calling out ND for bad recruiting tactics?

:)

I'm not saying it is dirty or illegal. I'm saying it is a stupid decision that will hurt ND, and therefore, I actually applaud the move :)

[EagleFan]

I believe the appropriate phrase here is "Screw Notre Dame!"

[BishopMVP]

Maybe this is inaccurate since I read it on an ND board, but I heard Pete Carroll took over a Patriots team coming off a Super Bowl and ran them into the ground, with their record getting worse and worse every year.

[miami_fan]

I heard an interview with Weis in which he said that one of the biggest problem he had with recruiting was the lack of understanding of the word "commitment". He did not just single out the kids though. His gripe was with both the kids and the other coaches.

[MrBug708]

This isn't the first time a coach has used this. Toledo had the same policy. Basically don't make me slow my efforts on other kids by committing to me and then changing your mind.

I agree with Charlie Weiss. If your ready to commit, then do it.

[BishopMVP]

On topic, I'm not sure it's that bad an idea. Weis already does the 2-3 offers out to players, whoever commits first gets it tactic, and stayed accountable to that (Mustain.) As long as the recruits know ahead of time, it just means they shouldn't commit to ND before they take all their visits.

[Logan]

We need an early signing period.

[Warhammer]

Maybe this is inaccurate since I read it on a USC board, but they said that Beano Cook was on ESPN and he said that Weis's new policy is that if a kid commits to Notre Dame and then visits another school that his scholarship will be revoked. Seems like a horrible policy if true that will only hurt ND's recruiting efforts.

Quite honestly (yes I am a ND fan, but this is something I have always felt), I say good for him if it works. The schools only have so many scholarships to hand out, and if a kid commits he gets a scholarship. In this case, there is something given up by either side. But, if the kid decides later to go to another school, the school that the kid originally committed to is screwed because there is not enough time typically to get another kid on board.

The opposite is true as well, I think that once a kid commits to a school, there should be an agreement in place immediately, and they should not have to wait until signing day to sign a letter of intent. The school should not be able to rescind their scholarship offer unless something defined in that contract is breached.

Heck, make each one a contract for all I care. If a top flight QB prospect doesn't want competition and he says he will only go to school if the school does not recruit another QB in his class, good for him if he can get it in there. If it is in the contract and the school breaks the contract, the kid can opt out of the commitment.

I think if Weis is successful in this, I think this is actually good for college football in the long haul. Then again, I'm naive and actually think atheletic scholarships in college should be for people who want an education, not those who are one and done, two and done, or three and done (unless they finish their degree early).

[Rich1033]

I'm not saying it is dirty or illegal. I'm saying it is a stupid decision that will hurt ND, and therefore, I actually applaud the move :)

Not a bad idea. Just tell the kids not to commit unless they are sure they want ND. Very understandable since they lost both Little kids on signing day.

Many times a school will have an agreement with a kid saying they wont take any more visits. Marquis Maze pretty much lost his ship from Michigan because he said he wouldnt take any more visits when he commited, then later went to Tennessee without informing Michigan. It didnt help he got in legal trouble on the UT visit. Im sure this happens all the time, decommits can really kill a recruiting class.

[digamma]

I don't think this is all that out of the ordinary. Mack Brown has been very public about this stance. Texas has lost a couple of recruits because of it, but they seem to be racking up their usual list of highly ranked early commitments.

[waltwal]

I wonder if when a QB for example commits does that then mean ND is restricted from recruiting another QB. I think there can be and should be changes made in College recruiting but i think ND is making an unwise decision given the current rules.

[Easy Mac]

I've been wanting coaches to do this for years. If only more coaches were this classy

[Mr. Wednesday]

I wonder if when a QB for example commits does that then mean ND is restricted from recruiting another QB.
It's up to ND. Scholarships and class slots are both limited resources, so any team that takes four QBs every year is going to have a shortage somewhere else. The NCAA does not tell schools how many players they can recruit at a given position, and rightfully so.

If you're worrying about a school overrecruiting in areas, ND isn't the one to get after. Look at some of the big state schools that offer more scholarships than they have with the expectation that some of the players won't qualify academically; if too many do, they wind up with a mess on their hands (I think this is where "greyshirting" comes into play).

[Mr. Wednesday]

Dola, and note that in a similar "you can't quit, you're fired!" move to what EF is discussing, in this recruiting season, Ferentz pulled Brian Smith's offer when he decided to look at ND again.

[Toddzilla]

I would imagine that a program that gets way more interest than available scholarships, this is a pretty smart plan. You don't want to promise a top 10 recruit a scholarship, then tell a dozen or so top-50 kids they can't come since you're out of schollys - so they commit somewhere else - only then to have your top-10 recruit visit another school and change his mind leaving you with kids out of the top 100. If ND can get away with it, more power to them.

[molson]

I have no problem with this at all. It's a bigger dick move for a kid to take a scholarship, then still shop around for something better, in the hopes of dumping the first school. That's not fair to anyone.

[Swaggs]

I think the big problem with this is that coaches/schools and scouting services, trying to get the inside track on tips, are making kids commit earlier and earlier. I know this year, WVU has already received three verbals (and I'll be shocked if they all stick by signing day) for the 2008 class.

Our coach pulled an offer to a kid that had given a verbal commitment because the kid wanted to make a visit within 2 weeks of signing day. I don't have a problem with that, because if you are still shopping yourself around that late in the process while the coaches are trying to finalize their classes, you are putting the coach in a tough spot.

[CU Tiger]

The only real thing I can add, is from a recuits point of view (right or wrong) a recruiting trip may be little more than a vacation. A guy who went to college with me took an official vist to a west coast school (SDSU or fresno I believe) simply because he grew up very poor and wanted to see Cali.

He told the coaches what he was doing and they replied that he was worth the risk just to get a chance to pitch him.

BTW I pull for ND immediately after the people's republic of china, but I applaud the stance by Weis.

[bhlloy]

Weis put a lot of effort into recruiting other schools commits this season before he got burned on national signing day. Until I see him not actively doing it this season, I won't comment on his character. Even if he doesn't actively recruit other teams committed players, what will he say if a commmited player wants to visit ND?

As somebody mentioned earlier in the thread, Mack Brown has had this policy for years. I think it will work better for Mack Brown than it will for Charlie, because Texas has a ton more local talent willing who grew up Longhorn fans and won't even look at another school.

The other, more nasty side of recruiting is when a kid who is fully committed to a school gets his scholarship pulled late in the process to accomodate a higher ranked prospect. If an early signing period would eliminate this, I'm all for it. Although what I think would probably happen is that the 2 and 3 star kids wouldn't get any big time offers until all the other options had been exhausted, and it wouldn't make things any easier for them at all.

[Butter]

BTW I pull for ND immediately after the people's republic of china

Which conference is the PRC in?

[Ksyrup]

Apparently Charlie Weis is attempting to continue to foster the idea that ND is some special place that kids should be honored to attend/play for, since the on the field evidence of that just ain't doin' it anymore. :p

[Eaglesfan27]

Apparently Charlie Weis is attempting to continue to foster the idea that ND is some special place that kids should be honored to attend/play for, since the on the field evidence of that just ain't doin' it anymore. :p


Exactly. I know that Mack Brown does this too, but Texas can get away with it because they have more clout with more recent national championships as well as more local Texas recruits that grow up idolizing their school. I still think this is going to hurt ND's football team.

[EagleFan]

Which conference is the PRC in?

FSEC

[MrBigglesworth]

The whole college system needs to be revamped. Look at everyone in this thread, they all are arguing from the point of view of what is best for the college programs instead of what is best for the student-athletes. A 17 year old kid has to make this decision, and it's a really tough one. Sometimes they change their minds. Regular students change their minds of what colleges they attend too, right up until the last minute. They'll be used as virtual slave labor for 5 years, they may as well be given as much time as possible to decide who to provide the labor to.

[EagleFan]

They'll be used as virtual slave labor for 5 years, they may as well be given as much time as possible to decide who to provide the labor to.

:rolleyes:

What color is the sky in your world?

[MrBigglesworth]

:rolleyes:

What color is the sky in your world?

What's your point of contention, that they really are allowed to be paid market wages or that they really shouldn't be given adequate time to make the decision?

[CU Tiger]

Which conference is the PRC in?
Du'uh the AoE

Along with Iraq, Iran, North Korea, and the mat company...

[waltwal]

Mr Wednesday you misunderstood my point about recruiting additional players at the same position. If a player (QB for example) commits early to a school it would seem to me he would say "I will commit and stand by my committment unless you go out and recruit additional players at my position." The real bottom line is that you have a set of rules that govern college football recruiting it is unrealistic to expect that players will not do things that ,however unpopular, are within the rules.

I am sure that if enough coaches felt that recruits should stand by their word on committing the rules would be changed to reflect the coaches desire but i don't think most coaches feel that way. I think most college coaches feel that they want to go down to the wire on recruits because coaches feel that they can win the competition. I think it is more likely, at least in the short run, that players will be restricted from making verbal committments. I think you have to go thru the recruiting process to understand why a player will change his mind after committing. The same things that occur in college recruiting occur in business recruiting. A player hears great things from someone and decides to commit- then he hears better things from someone else (not necessarily illegal things) and changes his mind. If adults change their minds why does it surprise anyone that a kid would do it.

One last point to consider. Lets say that Dec1 of a given year is the official start of recruiting. how about a rule that says no college coach who starts recruiting on Dec. 1 can resign his job to take a better one. After all if Weis wants kids to stand by their committments shouldn't Coaches and all their staff follow the same rules.

[Logan]

The whole college system needs to be revamped. Look at everyone in this thread, they all are arguing from the point of view of what is best for the college programs instead of what is best for the student-athletes. A 17 year old kid has to make this decision, and it's a really tough one. Sometimes they change their minds. Regular students change their minds of what colleges they attend too, right up until the last minute. They'll be used as virtual slave labor for 5 years, they may as well be given as much time as possible to decide who to provide the labor to.

They are given all the time they want, up until when registration closes at the school of their choice. There's no requirement that they sign on National Signing Day. There's also no requirement that they have to provide a verbal commitment before they're ready. As such, there's no requirement for a school to hold a scholarship open for a player who is still making their decision, especially when that player could decide to go elsewhere, and the school can miss out on another player if they wait too long. That's all most in this thread are arguing about.

Personally, I feel an early signing period will help with fixing many of these problems.

[rkmsuf]

Go play intramurals if you don't like it.

[MrBigglesworth]

They are given all the time they want, up until when registration closes at the school of their choice. There's no requirement that they sign on National Signing Day. There's also no requirement that they have to provide a verbal commitment before they're ready. As such, there's no requirement for a school to hold a scholarship open for a player who is still making their decision, especially when that player could decide to go elsewhere, and the school can miss out on another player if they wait too long. That's all most in this thread are arguing about.

Personally, I feel an early signing period will help with fixing many of these problems.
My point was just that most of the people in the thread are arguing over what would be best for the program, rather than what would be best for the student-athlete. I don't think an early signing period would fix anything, because kids would just be pressured to sign in early Sept or whenever instead of early February, and kids would just end up giving their verbals earlier. Furthermore, you'd be asking 17 year old kids to decide where they want to go to school before they have even had a day of their senior year of high school.

[EagleFan]

What's your point of contention, that they really are allowed to be paid market wages or that they really shouldn't be given adequate time to make the decision?

My point of contention is that every time you post you seem to have some sort of need to be a self-righteous "Hero of the little guy" and make statements like your slavery statement about the players. Your act is beyond tiresome at this point. Why don't you just move to a communist country and get it over with. You always spin anything that happens in this country into some sort of negative light, even now with a stupid little topic such as player recruitment. If things are always so bad, just freaking leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass. Sadly this is probably some sort of need for attention and I have taken the bait.


We may now return to our Notre Dame bashing (or defending, if that is your viewpoint), which is what this thread should be about anyway.... :D

[MrBigglesworth]

My point of contention is that every time you post you seem to have some sort of need to be a self-righteous "Hero of the little guy" and make statements like your slavery statement about the players. Your act is beyond tiresome at this point. Why don't you just move to a communist country and get it over with. You always spin anything that happens in this country into some sort of negative light, even now with a stupid little topic such as player recruitment. If things are always so bad, just freaking leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass. Sadly this is probably some sort of need for attention and I have taken the bait.
:D

Got it, there was no contention, you just wanted to waste everyone's time.

[Passacaglia]

My point was just that most of the people in the thread are arguing over what would be best for the program, rather than what would be best for the student-athlete. I don't think an early signing period would fix anything, because kids would just be pressured to sign in early Sept or whenever instead of early February, and kids would just end up giving their verbals earlier. Furthermore, you'd be asking 17 year old kids to decide where they want to go to school before they have even had a day of their senior year of high school.

Well of course we're talking about what's best for the program. It's the program that made the decision! If a high school kid said he wasn't going to go to Notre Dame, because they started recruiting another guy at his position, we'd be talking about what's best for that kid.

[bryce]

I have no problem with a kid changing his mind up until signing day. (And I'm a UT grad - my alma mater has been victimized by this by several high profile recruits in the last few years.)

The way I see it is a kid can commit to a school, attend that school, but then the coach can up and leave any old time he wants, and even though a kid may have gone to that school BECAUSE of that coach, he's left SOL if the coach leaves. Can the kid transfer? Sure, but he'll have to sit out a year, which obviously isn't the most ideal situation...

[DougWyatt]

Horrible recruiting tactic ?


I have no problem with this at all. It's a bigger dick move for a kid to take a scholarship, then still shop around for something better, in the hopes of dumping the first school. That's not fair to anyone.


I agree

[DougWyatt]

The whole college system needs to be revamped. Look at everyone in this thread, they all are arguing from the point of view of what is best for the college programs instead of what is best for the student-athletes. A 17 year old kid has to make this decision, and it's a really tough one. Sometimes they change their minds. Regular students change their minds of what colleges they attend too, right up until the last minute. They'll be used as virtual slave labor for 5 years, they may as well be given as much time as possible to decide who to provide the labor to.

Bullshit. You are taking commitment to lightly. Why should they have the right to hang a whole program in wait AFTER they've already made a promise ? By backing out, they aren't just effecting themselves - they are effecting other students that may have missed out on that slot and a school that didn't pursue filling that slot due to the fact that they had it filled. Everyone else shouldn't be punished because some kid is wishy-washy, and doesn't understand what commitment means.

Yes, the kids should take his time to make this "really tough" decision. But shouldn't they also know what commitment means ? If he isn't 100% ready to commit - don't. Simple.

[miami_fan]

The way I see it is a kid can commit to a school, attend that school, but then the coach can up and leave any old time he wants, and even though a kid may have gone to that school BECAUSE of that coach, he's left SOL if the coach leaves. Can the kid transfer? Sure, but he'll have to sit out a year, which obviously isn't the most ideal situation...

I feel that the kid should commit to the school instead of the coach,but since that is not the reality, I agree with you.

[Crapshoot]

My point of contention is that every time you post you seem to have some sort of need to be a self-righteous "Hero of the little guy" and make statements like your slavery statement about the players. Your act is beyond tiresome at this point. Why don't you just move to a communist country and get it over with. You always spin anything that happens in this country into some sort of negative light, even now with a stupid little topic such as player recruitment. If things are always so bad, just freaking leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass. Sadly this is probably some sort of need for attention and I have taken the bait.


We may now return to our Notre Dame bashing (or defending, if that is your viewpoint), which is what this thread should be about anyway.... :D

Tell you what - let me employ you for 4 years, not pay you, make a couple of billion dollars of you, and then you can be the self-righteous prick. College football is basically serfdom, and when people say they prefer it for the "innocence" or the "love of the game", what they mean is that they prefer cheaper rates and less athelete rights.

[Klinglerware]

How is the relationship between ND's athletic and admissions department these days? I vaguely remember back in the 90s, admissions would routinely reject high-profile ND commits. I don't remember it ever happening (since I would presume that you had to be admitted to be officially offered a grant in aid), but if admissions ever denied admission after a recruit signed an LOI, that would really be screwing the kid.

[CU Tiger]

Yes, the kids should take his time to make this "really tough" decision. But shouldn't they also know what commitment means ? If he isn't 100% ready to commit - don't. Simple.


I think the media word choice makes this a little hazy.
The only "REAL" commitment is the LOI, and even that has a revocation period.
Think about what a verbal commitment is. Some radio hack in college town, calls a kid at home after his official visit and says "Hey, how did you like our school?" Now if the kid says I love it I plan on signing on signing day. Rivals.com now has a solid verbal commitment.

But in actuallity the kid still has a right to 4 more official visits. If he is wowed by school 2,3,or 4 he can choose them. He is often asked when he doesnt have all the info.

Now if a kid tells his rc,pc or hc that "Coach I am firmly committed to State U" that is another story, but I would wager that statement is rare. It is generally a kid who is being high given pressure sales pitch and he hasnt yet learned to hurt anyone's feelings.

Look at it this way, you walk into Best Buy and look at a Plasma HDTV. The sales guy comes up tells you everything you want to know, is extremely pleseant, and overall you like him.

Now on the way out the door you are stopped.
"Say Joe Shopper, how did you like that TV? When do you plan to purchase that TV? You know our friendly sales man back there just had a baby and he needs some formula and diapers, the quicker you buy that TV the quicker his poor malnourished child gets to eat. By the way he will probably be fired if you choose not to buy it. Now you dont have to give me any money but tell me do you PLAN to buy that TV?"
"Uhhhh. yes I really like everything the TV has to offer, I feel me and the TV are a perfect fit"
"You heard it here first we have a solid verbal that Joe Shopper will buy this TV"

The kids are not faultless but we are talking about 17 year olds that have no life experience, that have never been sales pitched, never negotiated a deal, etc. It is a gut wrenching decision.

In '94 my home town newspaper's sports editor wrote a column that I was not dedicated and that any college that recruited me was foolish.

Why?

Because after visiting a local D-2 school he phoned me and asked if I was planning on going to said school. (which BTW he was an alum of) I replied that I was unsure and still planned to visit Clemson (where I eventually went). Next he inquired if I planned to visit South Carolina ( Clemson and USC are major rivals for anyone not close by) and I replied no, that I had grown up a Tiger fan, did not like South Carolina, they did not offer my planned major, and they had not even contacted me (a few fairly important factors imho).
This writer was known to have a slant towards SC in his stories and really was appalled that I didnt plan to vist the SC campus.

He even offered to "make some calls for me".
Uhhh, no they dont offer my major..

Point of all this I spent months getting hounded and questioned (granted on a relatively small scale, I cant imagine what a 5star recruit would go through)and having my character questioned by a grown man, because I turned down his 2 favorite schools.

There is no commitment until the paper is signed. I do think sometimes kids get pressured and dont know how to say no.

OK my epic is over, I need a nap...

[st.cronin]

My point of contention is that every time you post you seem to have some sort of need to be a self-righteous "Hero of the little guy" and make statements like your slavery statement about the players. Your act is beyond tiresome at this point. Why don't you just move to a communist country and get it over with. You always spin anything that happens in this country into some sort of negative light, even now with a stupid little topic such as player recruitment. If things are always so bad, just freaking leave and don't let the door hit you in the ass. Sadly this is probably some sort of need for attention and I have taken the bait.


We may now return to our Notre Dame bashing (or defending, if that is your viewpoint), which is what this thread should be about anyway.... :D


+1

[CU Tiger]

How is the relationship between ND's athletic and admissions department these days? I vaguely remember back in the 90s, admissions would routinely reject high-profile ND commits. I don't remember it ever happening (since I would presume that you had to be admitted to be officially offered a grant in aid), but if admissions ever denied admission after a recruit signed an LOI, that would really be screwing the kid.


Google the JoJo Cox Clemson story...
That is what sucks...

$.50 version
Cox commits as a junior.
Graduates and doesnt qualify.
attends a prep school at the diection of a Clemson coach.
Meets NCAA standards, clears the clearing house, and commits again to Clemson.
Only to have his application rejected by the AAC the day before igning day.

[Warhammer]

Tell you what - let me employ you for 4 years, not pay you, make a couple of billion dollars of you, and then you can be the self-righteous prick. College football is basically serfdom, and when people say they prefer it for the "innocence" or the "love of the game", what they mean is that they prefer cheaper rates and less athelete rights.

Let me tell you something, if I had the chance to get paid to go to school and have to play a sport I love, I'd do it in a heartbeat. If I had a chance to go to a school I wanted to for free, I'd do it. Heck, I'm still paying for going to the school I wanted to go to. Yet, no one is crying about my plight or that of probably 90% of those on this board.

College sports is not serfdom. You are getting paid. In some instances, you get paid more than the average American makes in a year. Check the numbers for room, board, and tuition at some of these schools, these kids are getting paid plenty. The fact that some people think these kids have to endure hardship to play a sport they enjoy in the hopes that they will be drafted and earn millions of dollars is joke.

While I was in college, I had to get my ass up at 7 in the morning to drag my ass to class by 8. I'd be in class until 2 or 3, then stay up studying a good bit of the night. All for the chance that I would get a leg up on the other guy when I joined the workforce. Not only that, but I paid for the right to do that. I paid for the chance that I would make decent money.

You want to talk about serfs? What about the graduate assistants that are doing research for professors that are getting paid millions of dollars to conduct research. How much of that money do the students see? About $8/hour depending upon the department you're in. That is a fraction of the money that these professors get for their research. Not only that, but woe to the grad student who disproved his professors thesis and could cost the department a million dollar contract.

And here we are sitting back and talking about how terrible these kids have it because they are getting a free education, a chance to be on TV, a chance to make more money than most of us will make in our lifetime, and we moan about how hard of a plight they have because the juggernaut that is college football is using them? Spare me. If this is being used, put me on the list as one of those that wants to be used.

[Klinglerware]

Google the JoJo Cox Clemson story...
That is what sucks...

$.50 version
Cox commits as a junior.
Graduates and doesnt qualify.
attends a prep school at the diection of a Clemson coach.
Meets NCAA standards, clears the clearing house, and commits again to Clemson.
Only to have his application rejected by the AAC the day before igning day.

That's crappy.

It's okay to have tight admissions standards, but admissions and the athletic department have to be on the same page about which kids are considered admissable, and they should be upfront with the recruits about their admissions chances as well.

[st.cronin]

Let me tell you something, if I had the chance to get paid to go to school and have to play a sport I love, I'd do it in a heartbeat. If I had a chance to go to a school I wanted to for free, I'd do it. Heck, I'm still paying for going to the school I wanted to go to. Yet, no one is crying about my plight or that of probably 90% of those on this board.

College sports is not serfdom. You are getting paid. In some instances, you get paid more than the average American makes in a year. Check the numbers for room, board, and tuition at some of these schools, these kids are getting paid plenty. The fact that some people think these kids have to endure hardship to play a sport they enjoy in the hopes that they will be drafted and earn millions of dollars is joke.

While I was in college, I had to get my ass up at 7 in the morning to drag my ass to class by 8. I'd be in class until 2 or 3, then stay up studying a good bit of the night. All for the chance that I would get a leg up on the other guy when I joined the workforce. Not only that, but I paid for the right to do that. I paid for the chance that I would make decent money.

You want to talk about serfs? What about the graduate assistants that are doing research for professors that are getting paid millions of dollars to conduct research. How much of that money do the students see? About $8/hour depending upon the department you're in. That is a fraction of the money that these professors get for their research. Not only that, but woe to the grad student who disproved his professors thesis and could cost the department a million dollar contract.

And here we are sitting back and talking about how terrible these kids have it because they are getting a free education, a chance to be on TV, a chance to make more money than most of us will make in our lifetime, and we moan about how hard of a plight they have because the juggernaut that is college football is using them? Spare me. If this is being used, put me on the list as one of those that wants to be used.

amen, brother

[Klinglerware]

You want to talk about serfs? What about the graduate assistants that are doing research for professors that are getting paid millions of dollars to conduct research. How much of that money do the students see? About $8/hour depending upon the department you're in. That is a fraction of the money that these professors get for their research. Not only that, but woe to the grad student who disproved his professors thesis and could cost the department a million dollar contract.



I've posted on this before--I agree that Ph.D. program grad students are typically the largest of the exploited groups on most campuses. But, as you point out, they are usually paid a stipend on top of free tuition. I would propose that scholarship athletes ought to receive some form of stipend too (though it probably shouldn't be as high as a grad student's, since universities usually pull in more from research grants than from athletics).

[Eaglesfan27]

Good post, Warhammer.

[Warhammer]

Not all are paid free tuition, but you're right many are. I just have far more sympathy for that group because they are in no way coddled, and have to kiss their professor's ass to make sure they can graduate. I've heard about several that went before the review board and we're told their thesis was crap, all because they got on their prof's bad side.

[Crapshoot]

Let me tell you something, if I had the chance to get paid to go to school and have to play a sport I love, I'd do it in a heartbeat. If I had a chance to go to a school I wanted to for free, I'd do it. Heck, I'm still paying for going to the school I wanted to go to. Yet, no one is crying about my plight or that of probably 90% of those on this board.

College sports is not serfdom. You are getting paid. In some instances, you get paid more than the average American makes in a year. Check the numbers for room, board, and tuition at some of these schools, these kids are getting paid plenty. The fact that some people think these kids have to endure hardship to play a sport they enjoy in the hopes that they will be drafted and earn millions of dollars is joke.

While I was in college, I had to get my ass up at 7 in the morning to drag my ass to class by 8. I'd be in class until 2 or 3, then stay up studying a good bit of the night. All for the chance that I would get a leg up on the other guy when I joined the workforce. Not only that, but I paid for the right to do that. I paid for the chance that I would make decent money.

You want to talk about serfs? What about the graduate assistants that are doing research for professors that are getting paid millions of dollars to conduct research. How much of that money do the students see? About $8/hour depending upon the department you're in. That is a fraction of the money that these professors get for their research. Not only that, but woe to the grad student who disproved his professors thesis and could cost the department a million dollar contract.

And here we are sitting back and talking about how terrible these kids have it because they are getting a free education, a chance to be on TV, a chance to make more money than most of us will make in our lifetime, and we moan about how hard of a plight they have because the juggernaut that is college football is using them? Spare me. If this is being used, put me on the list as one of those that wants to be used.

Here's the difference - you and I want to college, paid for it, but had no restrictions on what we could do in college to get employment. If I was a brilliant violinist, I'm not restricted from performing concerts just because my school is the only one to have a right. I was not restricted from having a job because my coach needs to make his $2M per year. I went to school with a bunch of scholarship kids, all of whom had the opportunity to seek employment based on their skill sets, and all of whom chose to do so. I've worked as a TA and research assistant - I don't need the lectures about how oppressed they are.

And spare me the tired cliches about having a chance to make more money than most do in a lifetime - that's a result of their skill sets, which they are NOT ALLOWED to take advantage of in college. Everyone involved makes money of those athletes - market value. 99.9% of college athletes are not making the pros - college and high school is the only time their skill set is worth a certain amount of money. Why aren't they allowed to take advantage of it on a market basis, like everyone else?

[Klinglerware]

Not all are paid free tuition, but you're right many are. I just have far more sympathy for that group because they are in no way coddled, and have to kiss their professor's ass to make sure they can graduate. I've heard about several that went before the review board and we're told their thesis was crap, all because they got on their prof's bad side.

In some ways, the Ph.D. program being akin to a scholarship athletic program is a reasonably good analogy. Specifically, most students in a Ph.D. program are funded, they are kind of like the "scholarship athletes"--they usually are demonstrably talented (many already have done research or have publications). There are a few others who are accepted into a program without funding, they're good, but the powers that be aren't as sure of their abilities--they are kind of like the "recruited walk-ons".

In a reputable program, most Ph.D. students will be funded right off the bat.

[Warhammer]

Here's the difference - you and I want to college, paid for it, but had no restrictions on what we could do in college to get employment. If I was a brilliant violinist, I'm not restricted from performing concerts just because my school is the only one to have a right. I was not restricted from having a job because my coach needs to make his $2M per year. I went to school with a bunch of scholarship kids, all of whom had the opportunity to seek employment based on their skill sets, and all of whom chose to do so. I've worked as a TA and research assistant - I don't need the lectures about how oppressed they are.

And spare me the tired cliches about having a chance to make more money than most do in a lifetime - that's a result of their skill sets, which they are NOT ALLOWED to take advantage of in college. Everyone involved makes money of those athletes - market value. 99.9% of college athletes are not making the pros - college and high school is the only time their skill set is worth a certain amount of money. Why aren't they allowed to take advantage of it on a market basis, like everyone else?

The fact of the matter is that if they want to attempt to make a living using their skill set they can. Go out in the real world, get a job playing basketball in the NBDL or whatever. You are free to do that. Is that the path to a successful playing career, probably not. But they are free to pursue that path. Heck, I know of plenty of places in town here where you have guys hustling others in pickup games.

However, if you chose not to do that, you have to live by the rules of the contract you sign. Its not like these kids don't know what they are getting into when they sign on with a school. The school gets their atheletic ability, and they get a free education.

Also, you're right. 99.9% of college atheletes don't make the pros. But they are still compensated by their free tuition, free room and board, as well as a top of the line health care system at these universities. They get a free education and all the help that they could possibly want to get through their classes.

Finally, if they don't like the system, they don't need to play. There's another kid behind him that would be willing to take his place. I know I would have.

[Warhammer]

In some ways, the Ph.D. program being akin to a scholarship athletic program is a reasonably good analogy. Specifically, most students in a Ph.D. program are funded, they are kind of like the "scholarship athletes"--they usually are demonstrably talented (many already have done research or have publications). There are a few others who are accepted into a program without funding, they're good, but the powers that be aren't as sure of their abilities--they are kind of like the "recruited walk-ons".

In a reputable program, most Ph.D. students will be funded right off the bat.

From what I have seen, the Ph. D students have it a heck of a lot better than the Masters students. My buddy that does R&D now went through hell for his Masters, but once he got into the Ph. D side of things, it got much easier.

[Klinglerware]

From what I have seen, the Ph. D students have it a heck of a lot better than the Masters students. My buddy that does R&D now went through hell for his Masters, but once he got into the Ph. D side of things, it got much easier.

Yeah, it's rough on the master's-only students. A lot of schools view them as cash cows, and they don't get as much attention as the Ph.D students. The trend nowadays, if you are serious about a Ph. D., is to apply directly into a Ph.D. program where you can get the MA on the way. That way you don't have to deal with a lot of the headaches of being unfunded, plus, since the professors know you are already in the Ph.D. program, you'll still get a little more attention even in your master's classes...

[Mr. Wednesday]

You want to talk about serfs? What about the graduate assistants that are doing research for professors that are getting paid millions of dollars to conduct research. How much of that money do the students see? About $8/hour depending upon the department you're in. That is a fraction of the money that these professors get for their research. Not only that, but woe to the grad student who disproved his professors thesis and could cost the department a million dollar contract.
I'm not going to argue that I'm paid well, but I disagree that the professors (at least in my department) are living the high life. That's not to say that they're not fairly well-compensated, but not in the millions; all that money they're raising goes to pay my stipend, my professor's salary, equipment purchases, and university overhead. Doing science research is expensive.

[Warhammer]

Much of it depends on how the setup is. Some professors are worse than others, and much of it depends on the field. History professors are typically not going to be living the high life. Engineering professors on the other hand can make an absolute fortune depending on how they are set up. Maybe not millions per year, but out of that million dollar contract they can get a quarter of it. Put a few of those together in a year and it adds up.

Most of the ones I have seen are engineering professors and I have seen some bad ones and some stand up guys. Some take all their funding and put it into their program, others take their funding and try to siphon off as much as they can.

Re-reading what I wrote I expressed myself incorrectly, you have professors receiving millions of dollars to conduct research, but the student see a fraction of it. Depending on the prof, some goes back into the department (as it should), or it can be buying the old lady a nice trip to Hawaii with others.

One prof I knew of, would get a contract, subcontract the research to his own privately held company which would then somehow contract the university's facilities and student to do the research. It was convoluted as hell, and the guy basically took 20% when it went through his company. The guy was crooked as hell, and would skew the results to continue research on whatever he was working on.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Mr Wednesday you misunderstood my point about recruiting additional players at the same position. If a player (QB for example) commits early to a school it would seem to me he would say "I will commit and stand by my committment unless you go out and recruit additional players at my position." The real bottom line is that you have a set of rules that govern college football recruiting it is unrealistic to expect that players will not do things that ,however unpopular, are within the rules.
I still don't really get what your point is. If you want to say that a player who has verbally committed then has second thoughts after the school continues to recruit at his position, then I wouldn't argue with that if he was misled. On the other hand, Weis promised Zach Frazer that he wouldn't recruit more QBs in that class, and as a result passed on Mustain when the latter re-opened his commitment (after seeing how Quinn's stats skyrocketed once Weis starting coaching him).

I am sure that if enough coaches felt that recruits should stand by their word on committing the rules would be changed to reflect the coaches desire but i don't think most coaches feel that way.
Maybe. Reportedly, a lot of coaches would favor an early signing day, but they disagree on when it should be.

I think it is more likely, at least in the short run, that players will be restricted from making verbal committments.
I disagree, I think there's no chance of a change in the verbal commitment process. The whole reason for verbal commitments is that a player can't put it in writing until signing day, so if he wants to signal that he's made a decision (and recruiting of him should be, but often isn't, closed) then he makes a verbal commitment.

One last point to consider. Lets say that Dec1 of a given year is the official start of recruiting. how about a rule that says no college coach who starts recruiting on Dec. 1 can resign his job to take a better one. After all if Weis wants kids to stand by their committments shouldn't Coaches and all their staff follow the same rules.
I think there's something to be said for the issues with what happens when coaches leave, but no way to resolve it. I think it's a good bet that anything of that nature would result in a prompt legal challenge the first time a coach wants to change jobs. Not to mention that the NCAA would have no way to exercise control over a coach leaving for a pro job.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Much of it depends on how the setup is. Some professors are worse than others, and much of it depends on the field. History professors are typically not going to be living the high life. Engineering professors on the other hand can make an absolute fortune depending on how they are set up. Maybe not millions per year, but out of that million dollar contract they can get a quarter of it. Put a few of those together in a year and it adds up.

Most of the ones I have seen are engineering professors and I have seen some bad ones and some stand up guys. Some take all their funding and put it into their program, others take their funding and try to siphon off as much as they can.

Re-reading what I wrote I expressed myself incorrectly, you have professors receiving millions of dollars to conduct research, but the student see a fraction of it. Depending on the prof, some goes back into the department (as it should), or it can be buying the old lady a nice trip to Hawaii with others.

One prof I knew of, would get a contract, subcontract the research to his own privately held company which would then somehow contract the university's facilities and student to do the research. It was convoluted as hell, and the guy basically took 20% when it went through his company. The guy was crooked as hell, and would skew the results to continue research on whatever he was working on.
I think that's the exception, rather than the rule.

[Easy Mac]

Here's the difference - you and I want to college, paid for it, but had no restrictions on what we could do in college to get employment. If I was a brilliant violinist, I'm not restricted from performing concerts just because my school is the only one to have a right. I was not restricted from having a job because my coach needs to make his $2M per year. I went to school with a bunch of scholarship kids, all of whom had the opportunity to seek employment based on their skill sets, and all of whom chose to do so. I've worked as a TA and research assistant - I don't need the lectures about how oppressed they are.

And spare me the tired cliches about having a chance to make more money than most do in a lifetime - that's a result of their skill sets, which they are NOT ALLOWED to take advantage of in college. Everyone involved makes money of those athletes - market value. 99.9% of college athletes are not making the pros - college and high school is the only time their skill set is worth a certain amount of money. Why aren't they allowed to take advantage of it on a market basis, like everyone else?

Doctors and lawyers are not allowed to practice their professions while in school.

[WVUFAN]

Doctors and lawyers are not allowed to practice their professions while in school.

But they can have jobs relating to the position they're training for ... student lawyers can get clerk positions or assistant jobs in law firms; medical students can get jobs as paramedics or EMTs. College Athletes in many cases cannot take an outside job AT ALL for fear of NCAA sanctions.

Also, name the last med student or PhD candidate who sold millions of dollars of items for his college based off his name alone, and never received a dime from it. Name a PhD candidate who wasn't allowed to make beanies to sell on EBay simply because his name was used in the selling of the item.

I (surprisingly) have to agree with Bigglesworth -- college athletes are not given the compensation they should for the value to universities. Either that, or allow them to make outside money based on what they do on the field or court.

[Crapshoot]

Doctors and lawyers are not allowed to practice their professions while in school.

EM, that's a result of licensing rules of the profession - moreover, its perfectly legal for me to offer you an extra $100G to come to Yale instead of Harvard. Addi tonally, they are allowed to do other things, like student nurses, EMT's (friends who did just this), and so forth.

[Easy Mac]

and athletes play football, their trade. They actually get to perform their profession, unlike law students, who only clerk or get internships.

As for your other point, you're pointing out the extremes, not the norms. the norm would be the thousands of college players who aren't good enough for the pros. I would say the university made little off of their names. You think the top lawyers in the nation don't give the university some sort of name recognition?

[Easy Mac]

EM, that's a result of licensing rules of the profession - moreover, its perfectly legal for me to offer you an extra $100G to come to Yale instead of Harvard. Addi tonally, they are allowed to do other things, like student nurses, EMT's (friends who did just this), and so forth.

And pro sports also have rules for entry, I don't see the difference there.

[WVUFAN]

and athletes play football, their trade. They actually get to perform their profession, unlike law students, who only clerk or get internships.

As for your other point, you're pointing out the extremes, not the norms. the norm would be the thousands of college players who aren't good enough for the pros. I would say the university made little off of their names. You think the top lawyers in the nation don't give the university some sort of name recognition?

You stated that that was an extreme (a player making money from his name), then used an extreme circumstance (a top lawyer giving a University name recognition) to argue the point.

My point is why shouldn't, say, Adrian Petersen be able to make legitimate money for his effort? If he's good, and nationally recognized for his talents , why shouldn't he be allowed to profit from that endeavor?

[Klinglerware]

Doctors and lawyers are not allowed to practice their professions while in school.

But they don't have an NCAA-imposed $2,000 income limit on part-time jobs. Scholarship athletes weren't even allowed to hold part-time jobs during the school year until a few years ago.

Athletic grant-in-aids don't cover many of the costs that are considered in financial aid calculations for regular students (supplies, transportation from home to school, etc). So, typically, the grant-in-aid still nets a short-fall of $2,000-$3,000 when these other costs are considered. For student-athletes from lower-income families, this results in quite a bit of struggle...

[Easy Mac]

And he will when the rules allow it, just like a hugely talented lawyer.

[Easy Mac]

But they don't have an NCAA-imposed $2,000 income limit on part-time jobs. Scholarship weren't even allowed to hold part-time jobs during the school year until a few years ago.

Athletic grant-in-aids don't cover many of the costs that are considered in financial aid calculations for regular students (supplies, transportation from home to school, etc). So, typically, the grant-in-aid still nets a short-fall of $2,000-$3,000 when these other costs are considered. For student-athletes from lower-income families, this results in quite a bit of struggle...

Thankfully they had so many other options that would have resulted in a better life.

[WVUFAN]

And he will when the rules allow it, just like a hugely talented lawyer.

If a hugely talented student lawyer did something while in school to gain name recognition that would allow him or her to make money while in school, they could. Only student athletes are disallowed from this opportunity.

[Eaglesfan27]

I don't know any student doctors who are in medical school that actually have the time to hold side jobs. For pre-med students, it is no problem. However, in medical school, student doctors are going to be studying or working in a hospital (and paying money as opposed to making it all 4 years) 60-80 hours per week on average.

[CU Tiger]

Let me tell you something, if I had the chance to get paid to go to school and have to play a sport I love, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Have to be careful how you define being paid here. Sure schooling is covered but you actually lose the opportunity to earn an income.

In some instances, you get paid more than the average American makes in a year. Check the numbers for room, board, and tuition at some of these schools, these kids are getting paid plenty. The fact that some people think these kids have to endure hardship to play a sport they enjoy in the hopes that they will be drafted and earn millions of dollars is joke.

Think about the ones who have no aspirations of being drafted, who simply work and sacrifice for the education


While I was in college, I had to get my ass up at 7 in the morning to drag my ass to class by 8. I'd be in class until 2 or 3, then stay up studying a good bit of the night. All for the chance that I would get a leg up on the other guy when I joined the workforce. Not only that, but I paid for the right to do that. I paid for the chance that I would make decent money.


This is where your argument really brakes down for me.
I had to be up at 4AM and be in the gym at 5. Class started at 8, and had no breaks during the day. Practice would start at 3 and run until 7:00. Then came "optional" film time (You were out of NCAA mandate time but if you missed this, well no one missed this lets say)usually over by 8:30. Now its time for evening workouts. Done by 10. Now lets go home and study. Oh by the way I could be kicked out of school for my grades dropping below a certain GPA. Not failing any classes or anything, still well above many general students but could be KICKED OUT not lose scholarship EVICTED from school.

Then comes the kick in the crotch, get injured on the practice field. Oops bye bye scholarship. And since you have been unable to wok the last few years, you have no money saved up, you are inelligible for Pell and most state grants because of your former athlete status(we wouldn't want any preferential treatment). If not for the alumni association not only would my education have cost me 6 surgeries and a permanent injury, but I wouldnt have been able to even finish school. Now luckily our athletic booster program picked up my general population scholarship after I denounced all remaining eligibility.



And here we are sitting back and talking about how terrible these kids have it because they are getting a free education, a chance to be on TV, a chance to make more money than most of us will make in our lifetime, and we moan about how hard of a plight they have because the juggernaut that is college football is using them? Spare me. If this is being used, put me on the list as one of those that wants to be used.

Again I am not saying poor pitiful athlete, and I know some "stars" dont have the experience I did. But it is not all glitz and glamour either.
These kids are used up and tossed away. My last two years of college I took no less than 24 credit hours any semester and worked 40 hours per week just to cover housing and meals so I could graduate. Because due to schedule restrictions I was behind on my degree progress and only had 2 years of funding to graduate. I paid the price, I got my degree, and I would doit agin in a heartbeat. But I knew day 1 I would never play in the NFL, and I sacrificed to get a degree I otherwise had no means of ataining. And for that I am left with a permanent limp and the promise of knee replacement surgery somtime in the future, oh BTW none of my medical treatment has been covered since then. The intial surgery was, but I have had 3 operations to clean up scar tissue and have been assured that synthetic joint replacement will be necessary to walk before I am 40. Again I am not asking for sympathy but please remember there are 2 sides to every story

[Warhammer]

You stated that that was an extreme (a player making money from his name), then used an extreme circumstance (a top lawyer giving a University name recognition) to argue the point.

My point is why shouldn't, say, Adrian Petersen be able to make legitimate money for his effort? If he's good, and nationally recognized for his talents , why shouldn't he be allowed to profit from that endeavor?

Quit school and sign up for NFL tryouts.

[CU Tiger]

I don't know any student doctors who are in medical school that actually have the time to hold side jobs. For pre-med students, it is no problem. However, in medical school, student doctors are going to be studying or working in a hospital (and paying money as opposed to making it all 4 years) 60-80 hours per week on average.

I agre whoel heartedly and commend doctors for the perserverence they have to display. My sister is currently in med school, and one of my best freinds just finished up his residency, so I know what it takes.

The only thing I would argue, is that if you persist and work hard you ARE guaranteed a nice income. Not everyone makes millions but there are no poverty level docs that are ethical and willing to work.

Many former athletes paid a price to now live in poverty.

[CU Tiger]

Quit school and sign up for NFL tryouts.

He isnt allowed that is the problem.

Remember Maurice Clarret and Mike WIlliams?

[WVUFAN]

Quit school and sign up for NFL tryouts.

Yeah, that's a copout. How about letting Adrian and others get compensation for his talents and the money he makes for the school. Give him the same rights EVERY OTHER non-athlete under scholarship has.

[Easy Mac]

But we've learned every other non-athlete doesn't have that opportunity either in their preferred profession.

[Warhammer]

Have to be careful how you defien being paid here. Sure schooling is covered but you actually lose the opportunity to earn an income.

Think about the ones who have no aspirations of being drafted simply work and sacrifice for the education

This is where your argument really brakes down for me.
I had to be up at 4AM and be in the gym at 5. Class started at 8, and had no breaks during the day. Practice would start at 3 and run until 7:00. Then came "optional" film time (You were out of NCAA andate time butif you missed this, well no one missed this let say)usually over by 8:30. Now its time for evening workouts. Done by 10. Now lets go home and study. Oh by the way I could be kicked out of school for my grades dropping below a certain GPA. Not failing any classes or anything, still well above many general students but could be KICKED OUT not lose scholarship EVICTED form school.

Then comes the kick in the crotch, get injured on the practice field. Oops bye bye scholarship. And since you have been unable to wok the last few years, you have no money saved up, you are inelligible for Pell and most state grants because of your former athlete status(we wouldn't want any preferential treatment). If not for the alumni association not only would my education have cost me 6 surgeries and a permanent injury, but i wouldnt have bee able to even finish school. Now luckily our athletic booster program picked up my general populatio scholarship after I denounced all remaining eligibility.

Again I am not saying poor pitifulo athlete, and I know some "stars" dont have the experience I did. But it is not all glitz and glamour either.
These kids are used up and tossed away. My last two years of college I took no less than 24 credit hours any semester and worked 40 hours per week just to cover housing and meals so I could graduate. Because due to schedule restrictions I was behind on my degree progress and only had 2 years of funding to graduate. I paid the price, I got my degree, and I would doit agin in a heartbeat. But I knew day 1 I would never play in the NFL, and I sacrificed to get a degree I otherwise had no means of ataining. And for that I am left with a permanent limp and the promise of knee replacement surgery somtime in the future, oh BTW none of my medical treatment has been covered since then. The intial surgery was, but I have had 3 operations to clean up scar tissue and have been assured that synthetic joint replacement will be necessary to walk before I am 40. Again I am not asking for sympathy but please remember there are 2 sides to every story

But, the end result is that you were able to get a degree that would have otherwise been unattainable, right?

My point is that there are a number of degrees that are very difficult to do if you hold a job on the side, pre-law, pre-med, engineering to name a few. Sure, you can get a job, but it suddenly becomes that much harder to keep the grades up if you do.

Additionally, its not like you didn't know what you were getting into when you signed up for it. For the record, I am also for rules against schools pulling scholarships due to injury. I think that if you go to a school on an atheletic scholarship and you keep your grades up, and you practice everyday and obey the rules, the school should have no grounds to pull your scholarship. If this took place, and some schools are better about this than others, there would be no need for players to have a stipend.

[WVUFAN]

But we've learned every other non-athlete doesn't have that opportunity either in their preferred profession.

Sure they do. They may not take advantage of it, but they COULD if they wanted. They may not have the time to do it, but the option is there for them.

Student Athletes simply do not have the chance.

Honestly, why shouldn't athletes have the chance to do, say, a commercial if they wanted for a car dealership? How does that hurt anyone?

[Easy Mac]

Lawyers can't practice law without a degree (except possibly California, I think that is the exception). Believe me, working at a law firm is not the same as being a lawyer. It be similar to being dropping out of college to be a college coach or something.

[WVUFAN]

Lawyers can't practice law without a degree (except possibly California, I think that is the exception). Believe me, working at a law firm is not the same as being a lawyer. It be similar to being dropping out of college to be a college coach or something.

But a student lawyer could film a commercial if they so chose. If a car dealership wanted Joe Smith the student lawyer to film a commercial, they could. Athletes can't. That's my point.

Joe Smith the student lawyer can make money from his name, but Steve Slaton the student athlete couldn't. Steve Slaton couldn't realistically take a job with the car dealership in any way.

[Warhammer]

Yeah, that's a copout. How about letting Adrian and others get compensation for his talents and the money he makes for the school. Give him the same rights EVERY OTHER non-athlete under scholarship has.

How is that a cop out?

I can't go into engineering after my first year of school. I can't make a living in medicine after my first year of school. What profession can you make a living after your first year of school?

[WVUFAN]

How is that a cop out?

I can't go into engineering after my first year of school. I can't make a living in medicine after my first year of school. What profession can you make a living after your first year of school?

What the hell does this have to do with my statement? I'm not talking about what happens AFTER school ... I'm talking about the treatment of student-athletes while they're in school. While the school is making money off of their talents, and in some cases, from their names?

Oh, and for the record, you can't go pro until you're TWO years removed from high school. Typically that means your junior year.

[Easy Mac]

I thought it was THREE years removed?

[CU Tiger]

How is that a cop out?

I can't go into engineering after my first year of school. I can't make a living in medicine after my first year of school. What profession can you make a living after your first year of school?

Technically you could.
Though rare there is no requiremnt that your degr take 4 years.
Am I wrong, but is a BS requried to become an EIT?
I *know* your degree doent have to specifically be an enginering degree, butIthought if you were smart enough you could take the EIT at 18 and rock on

[CU Tiger]

I thought it was THREE years removed?
It IS 3 years.
You can leave aftr your sophomore season IF you had a redshirt year in there.

[WVUFAN]

I thought it was THREE years removed?

You might be right.

[Warhammer]

What the hell does this have to do with my statement? I'm not talking about what happens AFTER school ... I'm talking about the treatment of student-athletes while they're in school. While the school is making money off of their talents, and in some cases, from their names?

Oh, and for the record, you can't go pro until you're TWO years removed from high school. Typically that means your junior year.

My point is that in any other occupation, you can't make any money for your talents in your profession. These atheletes are using the school every bit as much as the school is using them.

Arena Football and other football leagues will allow the players to play. Also, the fact that you can't play NFL Football for 3 years after HS helps make my point. The kids need the training from college. They get that training for free, so the kids are getting quite a bit from the school.

Sorry, but there is no argument you can make that is going to convince me that student atheletes need stipends. They can make just as much money from their professional skills as anyone else at that university can. Other forms of income were being abused by boosters which is why the rules are in place. They know the game going in, so why cry about it?

Also, EITs vary from state to state, I believe.

[CU Tiger]

I am going to say this and then sit back and watch cause this almost fees like a public IM session.

I have not at any point said that athletes deserve a stipend.
I am merely pointing out they do not all have the luxurious stress free life that some envision.

I have long been a fan of the so called Mehire rule. Where a set amount per game is put into fund in each students name. When and ONLY when he graduates this money is his, if he never gets his degre the money goes back into the schools/athletic dept. budget.

The ridiculous part in all this is Position coaches make more than many professors. I think there is a btter balance ther and maybe allocating som of that mony for the athletes would be nice.

[WVUFAN]

I am going to say this and then sit back and watch cause this almost fees like a public IM session.

I have not at any point said that athletes deserve a stipend.
I am merely pointing out they do not all have the luxurious stress free life that some envision.

I have long been a fan of the so called Mehire rule. Where a set amount per game is put into fund in each students name. When and ONLY when he graduates this money is his, if he never gets his degre the money goes back into the schools/athletic dept. budget.

The ridiculous part in all this is Position coaches make more than many professors. I think there is a btter balance ther and maybe allocating som of that mony for the athletes would be nice.

I'm not even saying they should get a bigger stipend. Just allow the players to make money in the private section just like any other student, outside of what he does on the field. The university isn't out any money that way, and a player can supplement his income.