Schools Paying For Stars' Insurance

[Smart]

I haven't seen a thread on this yet, which is surprising because I think it is a big development in college football. For decades, the NCAA has paid for insurance on career-ending injuries for star players. However, this policy is known to be extremely limited. The alternative is loss of value insurance, which can run into the mid five figures, but is obviously more comprehensive.

In the past, players have had to cover it themselves. This year, however, it has come out that at least three schools have used their "Student Opportunity Fund" to pay for their star's insurance. Those schools are TAMU (OT Cedric Ogbuehi), Florida State (QB Jameis Winston), and Wisconsin (RB Melvin Gordon).

So what are people's thoughts on this? Is this the functional equivalent of paying athletes? Does it reward stars to much? Could it be abused to benefit rich schools and entice recruits? Or is it a good thing to make it feasible for star players to get their degrees? Is this good or bad for college football?

Thoughts?

 

[FSUmanager]

It is called Loss of Value insurance. It covers more than injuries. It also covers draft stock drops. Last year ATM paid it for Manziel. FSU is paying a portion of Winston's he and his family are responsible for the rest. Typical premium is 50-60k for an 8-10 mil policy.

Not sure if it is right or not, but the NCAA let the cat out of the bag last year with Manziel.

 

[Codaxx]

I haven't seen a thread on this yet, which is surprising because I think it is a big development in college football. For decades, the NCAA has paid for insurance on career-ending injuries for star players. However, this policy is known to be extremely limited. The alternative is loss of value insurance, which can run into the mid five figures, but is obviously more comprehensive.

In the past, players have had to cover it themselves. This year, however, it has come out that at least three schools have used their "Student Opportunity Fund" to pay for their star's insurance. Those schools are TAMU (OT Cedric Ogbuehi), Florida State (QB Jameis Winston), and Wisconsin (RB Melvin Gordon).

So what are people's thoughts on this? Is this the functional equivalent of paying athletes? Does it reward stars to much? Could it be abused to benefit rich schools and entice recruits? Or is it a good thing to make it feasible for star players to get their degrees? Is this good or bad for college football?

Thoughts?

its clearly a payment. It obviously unbelieveably hypocritical. Schools can not afford to provide insurance to players, unless they have the chance to be stars and need an inducement to return to school.

 

[HuskerinBig10]

Codaxx started this thread in July

http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/...6765-university-buying-players-insurance.html

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

It's not a payment. It's an insurance policy thanking the student athlete for sticking around. The school understands the value these guys bring to the school and schools are making sure that by staying and playing for them the student athlete is taken care of in the off chance that something horrible happens.

A payment= "Here's 50k, thanks for staying."
This= "Should you get seriously injured playing for us, we will partially cover an insurance policy for you that your parents are also paying part of."

 

[Codaxx]

It's not a payment. It's an insurance policy thanking the student athlete for sticking around. The school understands the value these guys bring to the school and schools are making sure that by staying and playing for them the student athlete is taken care of in the off chance that something horrible happens.

A payment= "Here's 50k, thanks for staying."
This= "Should you get seriously injured playing for us, we will partially cover an insurance policy for you that your parents are also paying part of."

You can not be more wrong. A payment is a transfer of value or services. University PAYS 50k for an insurance policy for a star player. That player is named the BENEFICIARY of the insurance policy. Clearly he is getting a benefit that 99%+ of Universities students can not, because he is an excellent football player.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

You can not be more wrong. A payment is a transfer of value or services. University PAYS 50k for an insurance policy for a star player. That player is named the BENEFICIARY of the insurance policy. Clearly he is getting a benefit that 99%+ of Universities students can not, because he is an excellent football player.

Uh no.

None of these guys are receiving anything. There's a much better chance the school and their parents are actually losing money. If they get hurt and the policy kicks in, they'd still get nothing until they're no longer NCAA eligible. This isn't against the rules for a reason.

 

[4down20]

If it's for only 1 specific person, it's a payment for sure. Even extended to all it's still a payment, but when it's only specific people and they are only stars, then it's REALLY like a payment.

 

[4down20]

Uh no.

None of these guys are receiving anything. There's a much better chance the school and their parents are actually losing money. If they get hurt and the policy kicks in, they'd still get nothing until they're no longer NCAA eligible. This isn't against the rules for a reason.

So I can put a large sum of money into escrow with a player provided they play 4 years at Alabama, and they will not receive a penny of that money until after they are out of school unless they get a NFL draft contract for over 1 million, and that is legit?

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

It's no different than a scholarship. Some get it some do not, depending on their value to the programs.

A "transfer of value" as Codaxx put it is like saying it's wrong to give these players an education as it may be worth 75k when they graduate if that's what an employer pays them.

 

[4down20]

It's no different than a scholarship. Some get it some do not, depending on their value to the programs.

A "transfer of value" as Codaxx put it is like saying it's wrong to give these players an education as it may be worth 75k when they graduate if that's what an employer pays them.

It is different than a scholarship. The scholarship is to attend the school they play for and even walkons are attending the school. It's the primary function of the school, not paying insurance in case they don't make the NFL.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

So I can put a large sum of money into escrow with a player provided they play 4 years at Alabama, and they will not receive a penny of that money until after they are out of school unless they get a NFL draft contract for over 1 million, and that is legit?

That's not a fucking insurance policy that protects a student athlete who is risking millions of dollars by coming back to represent the school and finish his degree. These funds are used for any number of things that are need-based and NCAA approved. Like emergency trips home for people or tuition money for athletes after they're no longer eligible.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

It is different than a scholarship. The scholarship is to attend the school they play for and even walkons are attending the school. It's the primary function of the school, not paying insurance in case they don't make the NFL.

A scholarship gives one athlete free tuition and room and board etc, and doesn't give it to another. By your logic and Codaxx logic that is a payment and is wrong.

We are talking about schools doing the RIGHT THING insuring kids who are risking a lot to come back, play and continue their education and you guys bitch about it?

 

[4down20]

A scholarship gives one athlete free tuition and room and board etc, and doesn't give it to another. By your logic and Codaxx logic that is a payment and is wrong.

We are talking about schools doing the RIGHT THING insuring kids who are risking a lot to come back, play and continue their education and you guys bitch about it?

The scholarship is a payment, but it's allowed for obvious reasons.

I never said I was for or against it, I said it was a payment.

 

[Codaxx]

Uh no.

None of these guys are receiving anything. There's a much better chance the school and their parents are actually losing money. If they get hurt and the policy kicks in, they'd still get nothing until they're no longer NCAA eligible. This isn't against the rules for a reason.

This has monetary value. It is no different than giving All-Conference performers new cars. If they are not receiving anything than why does it cost money to get insurance? Insurance has an economic value. Just as an example:

X university buys player X a $5 million draft insurance
Insurance company has actuaries that figure out the odds are around 4% based on historic data that the insurance policy pays off. So the expected value of the policy is 20K.. Insurance company charges you 25k. you now have insurance. Insurance company has sold you something worth 20K at 25K and makes their profit. There is noway to say that the players are not receiving an additional benefit. (there are other factors, but kept simple for the sake of example)

The original article cited that this is a loop-hole in the system. None of the schools that bought insurance did anything illegal, but it is complete hypocrisy. Student athletes are ineligible for workers compensation for injuries, but the University can buy insurance to protect their draft status and ensure their "employment" for another year.

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

This has monetary value. It is no different than giving All-Conference performers new cars. If they are not receiving anything than why does it cost money to get insurance? Insurance has an economic value. Just as an example:

X university buys player X a $5 million draft insurance
Insurance company has actuaries that figure out the odds are around 4% based on historic data that the insurance policy pays off. So the expected value of the policy is 20K.. Insurance company charges you 25k. you now have insurance. Insurance company has sold you something worth 20K at 25K and makes their profit. There is noway to say that the players are not receiving an additional benefit. (there are other factors, but kept simple for the sake of example)

The original article cited that this is a loop-hole in the system. None of the schools that bought insurance did anything illegal, but it is complete hypocrisy. Student athletes are ineligible for workers compensation for injuries, but the University can buy insurance to protect their draft status and ensure their "employment" for another year.

And how is it a bad thing to do this for high value student athletes?
How is it any worse than a scholarship?

 

[Codaxx]

And how is it a bad thing to do this for high value student athletes?
How is it any worse than a scholarship?

How is a new car bad for an athlete? Is that worse than a scholarship?

 

[Jonny Valtimore]

How is a new car bad for an athlete? Is that worse than a scholarship?

Hahahahaha wow. We are gonna have to agree to disagree because this is a waste of my time.

 

[Codaxx]

Hahahahaha wow. We are gonna have to agree to disagree because this is a waste of my time.

-
I am simply pointing out that it not a valid argument. Lots of things are good for an athlete, but are violations. I am for all athletes being given insurance and workers comp rights. These are cases where only few are given a tangible economic benefit that is greater than other athletes. It is not much different than giving a 3 star recruit a scholarship and a 5 star a scholarship and a car.

 

[Smart]

I tend to agree with Codaxx. I don't understand how paying for loss of value insurance which costs $30,000+ is different than paying the star $30,000, especially if they were going to buy loss of value insurance anyways.