Recent Comments
Like I said, I'm not a big supporter of the NCAA.
And I'm really not opposed to a student athlete profiting from autographs and such. My only problem there is, you'd be opening the door for boosters to essentially buy players. There'd be nothing to stop a booster from saying "Hey, I'll pay you $50,000 for an autographed jersey if you come to my school."
If they were $20, I would probably go and even watch this team play knowing we are going to get killed.
I think a tiered ticket system of $10-15 nosebleed, $20 corners or behind backboard lower, $40 lower mid court, etc would work well in bringing in additional people over empty unsold tickets.
But student athletes are still far, far more compensated than the average student ever is?
Yes they are, but just because the rest of us don't have the life that a student athlete does, it doesn't mean that we have to bring their lifestyle down to our level.
the "plight of the student athlete" is lost on me.
There's no plight, unfair challenge, need for a paycheck for the student athlete - it's about maximizing your opportunities. If you can offer a service that society needs and will pay for, you should be able to pursue that opportunity.
HOKIE HOOPS WIZ
|
12 years 6 months
# | Northwestern Football Players Take Steps to Be Represented by Union The NCAA doesn't take a bath in any sport. The universities that are members of the NCAA take a bath in some of these sports but even these sports are starting to gain traction. See Texas sponsorship of its baseball field, making baseball a revenue generating sport there. Its all in how its managed, what the NCAA negotiates for television contracts for any sport plays a large roll in whether it breaks even as a sport. Those programs with todays conference and single school television networks are making it possible for every sport to be near or actually profitable.
OK - Get Ready for the next Hollywood Blockbuster "The Replacements II - College Scrubs"
I think most athlete's aren't happy because: we can't work a summer job or internship without it being called an improper benefit and losing our eligibility, we are not allowed to get $ from someone if they want an autograph.
Whats $50 to them when they make soo much off of the players. It just doesn't seem fair/right to tell a kid hey I know you're the next KD or Lebron but you can't make any $ or sign any autographs or even work a summer job because I'll call it a improper benefit and ruin your career.
It was a joke example, but I am not sure that a free poster in response to a giving level is "selling."
I can't believe there hasn't been a "Chicago way" joke made here yet, being that Northwestern kids are doing this.
Fair enough but the NCAA can't punish an athlete for getting $ for signing an autograph when they have 0% to do with what the athlete does on the court,field, ice or track.
It's the NCAA being greedy and saying were the only ones allowed to make money and the minute you challenge us we will just take your athletic eligibility away.
🥁STICK IT IN🥁
|
12 years 6 months
# | Northwestern Football Players Take Steps to Be Represented by Union 
The midweek pricing is a good idea... its NOT been done at all.
Keep in mind that hoops ticket$ have increased by 400% since the mid-80's. Its ridiculous. And during that time, the product has been less than stellar at least half the years.
Maybe they can do a deal like the satellite/cable providers do with referrals. For every friend you bring in you get X amount of dollars off of the minimum donation for each tier and each friend brought in gets Y dollars off of their minimum donation needs for each tier.
I just don't like the student athlete argument of the "NCAA is making millions of off me, so I want my cut."
Sure the NCAA makes money off of football and basketball. They also take a bath with all of the other sports. If you want the NCAA to pay you for supposedly making them money on the football field, does that in turn give the NCAA a license to recoup losses from students that row crew or play tennis?
Agreed. The current system is definitely flawed, but paying athletes isn't the answer.
I am a grad student, and I will graduate this summer (I hope) with about $30,000 of student loan debt. The research I and other grad students do is essentially a full time job (most of us work much more than 40 hours a week). For those fortunate enough to get an assitanceship, they get their tuition paid and a small monthly stipend to cover room and board costs. Those who don't must find external funding or foot the bill themselves.
The compensation is pittance compared to what I would make if I left school and took a job in industry, but I don't because I want the knowledge, experience, and professional benefits of having a Master's degree. And the money we bring to the school through research grant awards is considerable. Last year, Virginia Tech brought in a cool $271 Million in award money for research (almost 4x the Athletic Department Revenue), largely from the work of graduate students. So yeah, I don't really sympathize with the "plight of the student athlete" either.
Having said that, I do think the NCAA is pretty terrible.
Pretty sure the school isn't allowed to sell players' autographs, which would essentially be the case.
...which is evident in the number of transfers the program experienced. It was a turnstile.
Is Sam Rogers gonna have to truck a bitch?!
I agree here 100% but then its not fair for the NCAA to punish/take away an athlete's eligibility over a 50$ autograph when they make 1000 times that in 5 minutes. They either need to say go ahead if someone wants to pay for a college athlete's autograph I have no problem with that because I just made 100,000 off of his whole season. But to take punish them is a
This is one of those times where the Hokie Club leadership should hold a "Everybody get a Friend" drive. Contact every member and make it their goal to bring in one new member to the Hokie Club. If they manage that, than without Babcock having to do much, they can reach this increase. Have some sort of contest that keeps track of how many members were brought it by whom and then have some awards for the top getters.
I must be getting him mixed up with Ford?
I'd rather see that money kicked back to the school for academics/sports/etc.
Sure, a guy like Johnny Football brings in a ton of money to the school, but does everyone on the football team bring in that money? Do they all deserve equal compensation for voluntarily playing a game? And if not, do you pay the star players some money, but not the backups? One could argue that the players who really bring in the money, the "star" players, will get easily compensated by moving on to the professional level, where 500k a year "isn't very much money." At that point, I think their 5k of debt suddenly becomes insignificant.
Now, I understand there are a lot of issues with this thinking- but I don't think you can necessarily say that we should just pay every athlete. I'd rather see them be allowed to sell and market their own names/likeness, etc. Or I'd rather them stop the whole pretense of "student athletes" for big-time sports (football, basketball). Just say it's a minor league. You either go into the minor leagues because you want to make it big in professional sports, and you get a salary just like any other working person, or you use your athletic ability to get an education at a reduced cost, but you won't be paid for doing so.
I don't dispute the need for some new energy and focus on developing the donor base. I guess it all depends on the timeframe for the increase. I interpreted the original calculation to be how to get an additional $1,000,000 per year. To do that through Hokie club membership at the $100 level the club would have to magically double in size. I believe that the new AD is going to have other challenges (see the BBall threads) that will be a higher priority. If he generates a 100% increase in Hokie Club memberships in one year then we should give him an immediate extension.
I think some of this is perspective, I'm saying doubling the size of the current organization in a year is a lofty goal. You are all saying that the population of the fan base (the market) is large enough to support that increase.
I get your point but look at what the NCAA as a whole makes vs what we receive for our talent on the field. Yes we get an education and hopefully land a job after.
I'm not saying they should get paid massive contracts or even 10k I'm just saying 2-3k in the athlete's pocket wouldn't hurt when they bring in so much.
Exactly. If the tickets were say $10. I would gladly go to the Cassell and support my Hokies. But no way am I paying $35. If we were a better team...I wouldn't think twice.
Student Athletes- mhm so were not employees but we provide the services for you to make billions of $.. I honestly could see a huge uproar in the next 2-3 years and college sports could be going out the door.