IMO they need to be paid a certain stipend because football takes up more time than a part time job ever would, but they are offered free room at a dorm. I would happily live in a dorm with no bills instead of getting a job and trying to balance that with school and football just to live off campus.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I was just assuming I guess. He's on scholarship at Nebraska. The 12% is a somewhat deceiving number when you are looking at football players. The big schools take care of their football players. It's the baseball, softball, wrestling kind of sports that don't get all the amenities. So when you add all NCAA athletes together you get 12%.
Edit: I just want to reiterate that I'm not saying that they don't deserve some sort of stipend. Football takes up so much time that they should never have to get a part time job to survive. I'm just saying that IF he was offered free stay in a dorm he should've taken it so he wouldn't have this burden on him.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I agree with the dorm thing that's true, it obviously is personal preference so that's a mute point.
To give ya'll a bit of info each div 1 school can give up to 85 scholarships.. However each school is not fully funded so some schools could have only 60 or 70 it depends on a lot of different things.
I wouldn't say an athlete should never have to get a part time job/summer job but the NCAA regulates what we can make with that job/where we can work.
SO Full Ride athlete- can make up to 2,000 a semester but can't work for the school/athletic department.
Partial Ride athlete- Can make up to 2,000 a semester but also can work with school/athletic department.
$2,000 isn't a lot of money IMO, so once you hit that $2,001 you have received a impermissible benefit and could lose eligibility.It's tough to think the NCAA basically "owns" the athlete and gets to make $ of off their performance/name but an athlete can't get a normal 9-5 summer job making more than $2,000 per semester
I'm amazed a D1 athlete could make the time for a job, the sport, and school. I agree $2,000 is nothing when you start paying bills. And buying Nutella
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I might look at it this way. When I was a grad student, (not at Tech), I was also a GA. I got my expenses covered, plus a stipend of about 750 per month. This was enough for rent and some extras, and all I had to do was help the professor with research, prepare lectures, provide office hours for students to stop by, and grade papers, along with keeping grades up.
It probably didn't take as much time up as a sports program, but I was also allowed to have another job with no limits on how much I made as long as it didn't interfere with me keeping up with everything else.
It's silly that the NCAA doesn't allow student athletes to make more than a certain amount of money per semester if they feel they have time to hold another job. If they're making the same amount of money per hour as the next guy...not being treated as special...or anything like that, I don't really get what the big deal is.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Obviously theres always more to the story but what happened to all his scholarship money? Even though he's living off campus, schools give players a check for the cost of room and board that they would get from living on campus. Could potentially be a case of him taking that check and using it on miscellaneous items.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yeah, but you're talking about Lincoln, NE, not Atlanta. And even then, student housing is almost always ridiculously cheap compared to other options around town. Living in Raleigh, I know that student housing around NC State, which is close to the capitol district, is really cheap (~$250/m) so unless you're telling me that student housing in Lincoln is over 3x more expensive than Raleigh, I am absolutely not buying the whole 'needs to bartend to make ends meet' thing when he's getting a $800 check monthly from the school.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
At Tech, Room and Board is $7,924 based upon the estimated Cost of Attendance, although that varies based upon your room and meal plan. So if a student is at school for August to May, that's 10 months out of the year. ~$8,000/10 = $800. At Nebraska, Room and Board is $9,961. So in theory, he should be looking at closer to $1,000. Unless they receive checks year-round, in which case, the checks would be for $830 which makes more sense.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I see this article this morning and I want to go in for more but its honestly exhausting trying to explain the normal athlete life. Regardless how it gets put, it won't matter
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I think you've done a fine job explaining your perspective, and I think plenty of people you've explained it to understand the normal athlete's life.
We just disagree that they need to be paid much beyond the cash equivalent of 50 to 135k they already receive via their scholarship & the benefits & perks they are afforded by being student-athletes.
I agree that the NCAA shouldn't be able to profit off the likenesses of specific student athletes. This is wrong and should be challenged and overturned. IMO, that is the most egregious thing going on, and the area where the most agreement can be found and put to some productive end.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yes!!!! I think the school shouldn't have to do anything else, they do a great job for athletes all over the nation. The biggest problem is the NCAA by itself, they're the ones that makes the $ and other crap from these athletes. Its not athletes vs the schools its athletes vs the NCAA.
Akron did everything and anything for me and I wouldn't trade it for a thing but it is kinda funny to turn on NCAA14 or NCAA13 and see a 98% complete replica of yourself only to be named "#81" or "Johny Michaels" That's not the schools issue that's the NCAA's issue.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
He's got a good point here. If a game company is given the opportunity to make a buck of their image or name and NCAA essentially gets a kickback, then the NCAA needs to get some of that cash down to the guy that is being imaged/named.
That's not on the school, that's on the NCAA that licensed the image.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
But thats the problem... this isn't going to end up costing the NCAA anything, its going to end up costing the schools. The same schools that are already run on a razor thin budget. The NCAA isn't going to be paying a dime.
The endgame is for schools to pay players to play, not for the NCAA to set up some kind of trust that gets paid to the players after their eligibility is up. There's 2 separate discussions going on right now.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
well if the ncaa is going to put it on the school then the schools should be going to the NCAA and saying no no no look at how much you make of these athletes. I..being the school don't make a dime because everything we get goes back into the athletic department/school for other needs.
Its a mess and it will be a long process for big things to get started
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
And in the meantime, the unintended consequences are going to wreak absolute havoc on athletic departments around the country. Once the floodgates open and athletes are starting to get paid, non-rev sports are going to be circling the drain. Either that, or athletic departments will start cutting their football or basketball programs, to save themselves from the extra expenses they won't be able to afford, like Hawaii has already said they will likely do with football. And this isn't even addressing the eventual end game of the Power 5 splitting away from the NCAA altogether.
If I were a betting man, I'd wager that you'll never see a dime of financial kickback paid from the NCAA to athletes. The buck has already been passed to the schools.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Then in reality its pretty sad that such a big organization as the NCAA is going to puss out when they get challenged about giving the players a stipend. But life is not fair and IMO I don't really need $ from the NCAA just see it as them being cowards
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
The NCAA is not that big of an organization itself. Sure it has a lot of members (1,100 colleges & universities) But there are only something like 500 actual NCAA employees and a NCAA budget of $30-35 million.
96% of the $800 million in revenues that the NCAA collects goes back to the member colleges and universities. That money is then spent on athletic & academic programs for student athletes... you know things like the free tution, free tutoring, free housing, free food, free training, free medical care, free coaching and free marketing that scholarship players recieve.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
My point wasn't that the NCAA needs to pay into a trust.
They need to stop licensing the use of specific players likenesses for profit.
So, yes, it would end up costing the NCAA money, because game-makers are likely not going to be willing to pay as much if their product isn't as close to real-life as they are accustomed to making.
And I am perfectly, one-hundred percent on board with the NCAA, a not-for-profit organization, learning to tighten their belts, implement some financial efficiencies, and focus their efforts on core functions rather than shiny digs, employee perks, and fat salaries.
It is a significant conflict of interest for them to rule that students may not make money off themselves, only to have the NCAA receive income off the exact same commodity. Indeed, one can fairly question whether the NCAA's position has as much to do with potential corruption at member institutions, as it does with their own financial interest.
By what stretch of the imagination and moral equivalency is it acceptable that Mark Emmert now makes 1.7 million dollars per year as the president of a non-profit with a fundamental goal of keeping college athletes from appearing corrupted by outside influences like video-game companies?
Currently the NCAA is widely regarded as a joke in regards to their ability and/or willingness to enforce the rules they apply to athletes and institutions in a fair and consistent manner.
So excuse me if I don't cry a river if they simply can't or won't do their jobs and find the institutions they wish to leech off of decide to move to a better model on their own.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
IMO they need to be paid a certain stipend because football takes up more time than a part time job ever would, but they are offered free room at a dorm. I would happily live in a dorm with no bills instead of getting a job and trying to balance that with school and football just to live off campus.
how do you know he was offered a "free dorm room" is that with his 100% scholarship that 12% of athletes in the NCAA have?
I was just assuming I guess. He's on scholarship at Nebraska. The 12% is a somewhat deceiving number when you are looking at football players. The big schools take care of their football players. It's the baseball, softball, wrestling kind of sports that don't get all the amenities. So when you add all NCAA athletes together you get 12%.
Edit: I just want to reiterate that I'm not saying that they don't deserve some sort of stipend. Football takes up so much time that they should never have to get a part time job to survive. I'm just saying that IF he was offered free stay in a dorm he should've taken it so he wouldn't have this burden on him.
I agree with the dorm thing that's true, it obviously is personal preference so that's a mute point.
To give ya'll a bit of info each div 1 school can give up to 85 scholarships.. However each school is not fully funded so some schools could have only 60 or 70 it depends on a lot of different things.
I wouldn't say an athlete should never have to get a part time job/summer job but the NCAA regulates what we can make with that job/where we can work.
SO Full Ride athlete- can make up to 2,000 a semester but can't work for the school/athletic department.
Partial Ride athlete- Can make up to 2,000 a semester but also can work with school/athletic department.
$2,000 isn't a lot of money IMO, so once you hit that $2,001 you have received a impermissible benefit and could lose eligibility.It's tough to think the NCAA basically "owns" the athlete and gets to make $ of off their performance/name but an athlete can't get a normal 9-5 summer job making more than $2,000 per semester
NCAA Jobs
Ah but is he declaring his tips...
I have no idea, that's a good question.. I'm sure the NCAA has found a way to make sure tips are included.
I'm amazed a D1 athlete could make the time for a job, the sport, and school. I agree $2,000 is nothing when you start paying bills. And buying Nutella
I might look at it this way. When I was a grad student, (not at Tech), I was also a GA. I got my expenses covered, plus a stipend of about 750 per month. This was enough for rent and some extras, and all I had to do was help the professor with research, prepare lectures, provide office hours for students to stop by, and grade papers, along with keeping grades up.
It probably didn't take as much time up as a sports program, but I was also allowed to have another job with no limits on how much I made as long as it didn't interfere with me keeping up with everything else.
It's silly that the NCAA doesn't allow student athletes to make more than a certain amount of money per semester if they feel they have time to hold another job. If they're making the same amount of money per hour as the next guy...not being treated as special...or anything like that, I don't really get what the big deal is.
Obviously theres always more to the story but what happened to all his scholarship money? Even though he's living off campus, schools give players a check for the cost of room and board that they would get from living on campus. Could potentially be a case of him taking that check and using it on miscellaneous items.
Yeah, funny how details like that always seem to elude these kinds of 'stories.'
Guess they don't fit the narrative being pushed.
He said he receives check for $800 per month
$800 check for room and board?
I'm sorry, I must be missing something, cause I can't recall the last time I saw student housing rent for even half that much.
Varies by university. Student housing at GT (in ATL) is far more expensive than it is at VT.
Yeah, but you're talking about Lincoln, NE, not Atlanta. And even then, student housing is almost always ridiculously cheap compared to other options around town. Living in Raleigh, I know that student housing around NC State, which is close to the capitol district, is really cheap (~$250/m) so unless you're telling me that student housing in Lincoln is over 3x more expensive than Raleigh, I am absolutely not buying the whole 'needs to bartend to make ends meet' thing when he's getting a $800 check monthly from the school.
At Tech, Room and Board is $7,924 based upon the estimated Cost of Attendance, although that varies based upon your room and meal plan. So if a student is at school for August to May, that's 10 months out of the year. ~$8,000/10 = $800. At Nebraska, Room and Board is $9,961. So in theory, he should be looking at closer to $1,000. Unless they receive checks year-round, in which case, the checks would be for $830 which makes more sense.
I see this article this morning and I want to go in for more but its honestly exhausting trying to explain the normal athlete life. Regardless how it gets put, it won't matter
I think you've done a fine job explaining your perspective, and I think plenty of people you've explained it to understand the normal athlete's life.
We just disagree that they need to be paid much beyond the cash equivalent of 50 to 135k they already receive via their scholarship & the benefits & perks they are afforded by being student-athletes.
I agree that the NCAA shouldn't be able to profit off the likenesses of specific student athletes. This is wrong and should be challenged and overturned. IMO, that is the most egregious thing going on, and the area where the most agreement can be found and put to some productive end.
Yes!!!! I think the school shouldn't have to do anything else, they do a great job for athletes all over the nation. The biggest problem is the NCAA by itself, they're the ones that makes the $ and other crap from these athletes. Its not athletes vs the schools its athletes vs the NCAA.
Akron did everything and anything for me and I wouldn't trade it for a thing but it is kinda funny to turn on NCAA14 or NCAA13 and see a 98% complete replica of yourself only to be named "#81" or "Johny Michaels" That's not the schools issue that's the NCAA's issue.
He's got a good point here. If a game company is given the opportunity to make a buck of their image or name and NCAA essentially gets a kickback, then the NCAA needs to get some of that cash down to the guy that is being imaged/named.
That's not on the school, that's on the NCAA that licensed the image.
But thats the problem... this isn't going to end up costing the NCAA anything, its going to end up costing the schools. The same schools that are already run on a razor thin budget. The NCAA isn't going to be paying a dime.
The endgame is for schools to pay players to play, not for the NCAA to set up some kind of trust that gets paid to the players after their eligibility is up. There's 2 separate discussions going on right now.
well if the ncaa is going to put it on the school then the schools should be going to the NCAA and saying no no no look at how much you make of these athletes. I..being the school don't make a dime because everything we get goes back into the athletic department/school for other needs.
Its a mess and it will be a long process for big things to get started
And in the meantime, the unintended consequences are going to wreak absolute havoc on athletic departments around the country. Once the floodgates open and athletes are starting to get paid, non-rev sports are going to be circling the drain. Either that, or athletic departments will start cutting their football or basketball programs, to save themselves from the extra expenses they won't be able to afford, like Hawaii has already said they will likely do with football. And this isn't even addressing the eventual end game of the Power 5 splitting away from the NCAA altogether.
If I were a betting man, I'd wager that you'll never see a dime of financial kickback paid from the NCAA to athletes. The buck has already been passed to the schools.
Then in reality its pretty sad that such a big organization as the NCAA is going to puss out when they get challenged about giving the players a stipend. But life is not fair and IMO I don't really need $ from the NCAA just see it as them being cowards
The NCAA is not that big of an organization itself. Sure it has a lot of members (1,100 colleges & universities) But there are only something like 500 actual NCAA employees and a NCAA budget of $30-35 million.
96% of the $800 million in revenues that the NCAA collects goes back to the member colleges and universities. That money is then spent on athletic & academic programs for student athletes... you know things like the free tution, free tutoring, free housing, free food, free training, free medical care, free coaching and free marketing that scholarship players recieve.
laughable but i wont get into this comment. its too easy to pick apart
My point wasn't that the NCAA needs to pay into a trust.
They need to stop licensing the use of specific players likenesses for profit.
So, yes, it would end up costing the NCAA money, because game-makers are likely not going to be willing to pay as much if their product isn't as close to real-life as they are accustomed to making.
And I am perfectly, one-hundred percent on board with the NCAA, a not-for-profit organization, learning to tighten their belts, implement some financial efficiencies, and focus their efforts on core functions rather than shiny digs, employee perks, and fat salaries.
It is a significant conflict of interest for them to rule that students may not make money off themselves, only to have the NCAA receive income off the exact same commodity. Indeed, one can fairly question whether the NCAA's position has as much to do with potential corruption at member institutions, as it does with their own financial interest.
By what stretch of the imagination and moral equivalency is it acceptable that Mark Emmert now makes 1.7 million dollars per year as the president of a non-profit with a fundamental goal of keeping college athletes from appearing corrupted by outside influences like video-game companies?
Currently the NCAA is widely regarded as a joke in regards to their ability and/or willingness to enforce the rules they apply to athletes and institutions in a fair and consistent manner.
So excuse me if I don't cry a river if they simply can't or won't do their jobs and find the institutions they wish to leech off of decide to move to a better model on their own.