THE PAC12 THREAD v.4

[Olyduck]

I've heard that wouldn't hold up. They dont bring in the money. title IX just means they have to fund womens sports teams as much as the mens but what comes in from football can be spent how they choose. I dont know any womens coaches being paid like mens coaches .

For example
UConn Kevin Ollie 1 NC 3 million ish Geno Auriemma 11 titles 2 million ish
he is the highest paid coach of a womens team and that would still put him in the top 25 or so of mens coaches but even at his own school he makes far less.

 

[WizardHawk]

I've heard that wouldn't hold up. They dont bring in the money. title IX just means they have to fund womens sports teams as much as the mens but what comes in from football can be spent how they choose. I dont know any womens coaches being paid like mens coaches .

The point is if they give all of the profits they are making to the players there isn't ANY money for those other programs. They are all funded by the football profits. Not just coaches salaries, but uniforms, staff, equipment, etc. Where would the universities comes up with the money to continue those programs? I mean I know a lot of people would say screw them and just dump every non football/basketball program, but I just don't see that happening.

No, I wouldn't give them funds for them for when they are out of school. They are on the right track now. Maybe they need to add even more, but they aren't miles off. They are closer to being where they should be IMO than they ever have been and probably aren't that far off.

Kids in these programs are not allowed to have jobs because football takes up time all throughout the year. So support them enough to make up for that. Make sure they have everything they need for school and some kind of general spending money, but not more than a few thousand a year and every kid gets the same no matter how much game time they have or don't have. Has to be 100% equal. And they have been working toward that exactly.

Whether or not you agree with Rosen's comments, it's still lame for him to give them out in that way. He's the face of the program. There are ways of expressing yourself in a more dignified way. It's petty childish BS IMO. His message gets lost because of how he delivered it.

 

[socaljim242]

The point is if they give all of the profits they are making to the players there isn't ANY money for those other programs. They are all funded by the football profits. Not just coaches salaries, but uniforms, staff, equipment, etc. Where would the universities comes up with the money to continue those programs? I mean I know a lot of people would say screw them and just dump every non football/basketball program, but I just don't see that happening.

No, I wouldn't give them funds for them for when they are out of school. They are on the right track now. Maybe they need to add even more, but they aren't miles off. They are closer to being where they should be IMO than they ever have been and probably aren't that far off.

Kids in these programs are not allowed to have jobs because football takes up time all throughout the year. So support them enough to make up for that. Make sure they have everything they need for school and some kind of general spending money, but not more than a few thousand a year and every kid gets the same no matter how much game time they have or don't have. Has to be 100% equal. And they have been working toward that exactly.

Whether or not you agree with Rosen's comments, it's still lame for him to give them out in that way. He's the face of the program. There are ways of expressing yourself in a more dignified way. It's petty childish BS IMO. His message gets lost because of how he delivered it.

I just find it hard to believe that UW can get 66 million in revenues from football have 29 millions in expenses and somehow can't work out a small percentage from the 37 million it siphons off. The whole world would end if .5 million went into a fund before they spend it on something else.

 

[RegentDenali]

How much more income and job opportunities are available to these football and basketball players if they get a degree from a university like Cal, Stanford, UCLA or UW? Compared to if they just graduated or dropped out of high school. And they walk away with 0 debt from school, where as the parents of and regular students can be in debt over 6 figures when those 4 years are over.

 

[socaljim242]

How much more income and job opportunities are available to these football and basketball players if they get a degree from a university like Cal, Stanford, UCLA or UW? Compared to if they just graduated or dropped out of high school. And they walk away with 0 debt from school, where as the parents of and regular students can be in debt over 6 figures when those 4 years are over.

Education and job opportunities are also what the womens softball team gets and the tennis team gets but the University doesn't make a dime after their season is over. UW gets 37 million from football every year. They go and recruit this player with grades barley good enough to graduate from High School with the promise of a degree when they know that this kid is not prepared for what regular college students have to deal with. Lets be real. Most of these players who end up getting degrees are getting jobs from alums. That's the real payoff

 

[WizardHawk]

I just find it hard to believe that UW can get 66 million in revenues from football have 29 millions in expenses and somehow can't work out a small percentage from the 37 million it siphons off. The whole world would end if .5 million went into a fund before they spend it on something else.

Your math isn't even close because you have no idea what all of that costs.

Not only does the school bring in football revenue, but it also takes in quite a bit in donations every year. And despite all of that income they can't afford to begin to do the renovations needed for the basketball facilities knowing that doing those things also brings in extra money.

Again, they would have to end other programs to take more money out. End of story. Which programs exactly do you want them to eliminate so football players can get even more spoiled than they already are? Not in general terms. EXACTLY which sports and programs should be eliminated for these extras you want to give out that are above and beyond what they are already doing. Because you can't have it both ways.

 

[socaljim242]

Your math isn't even close because you have no idea what all of that costs.

Not only does the school bring in football revenue, but it also takes in quite a bit in donations every year. And despite all of that income they can't afford to begin to do the renovations needed for the basketball facilities knowing that doing those things also brings in extra money.

Again, they would have to end other programs to take more money out. End of story. Which programs exactly do you want them to eliminate so football players can get even more spoiled than they already are? Not in general terms. EXACTLY which sports and programs should be eliminated for these extras you want to give out that are above and beyond what they are already doing. Because you can't have it both ways.

Seriously? With every TV deal every Nike or Addidas and other funds they get they can't find a way to put aside 500k a year or something to put into an account for the players to get when they leave? And no I dont mean for each one I meant for all of them.lol. You can pay everyone else but not the ones doing the actual work. It's like everything else you spend it if you have it. If they treated the players like an extra assistant coach how hard would it be to find the money? They would get it in a heartbeat. But say it's for the players and suddenly you have to make the womens golf team walk to their matches.


According to our research engine:
The University of Washington-Seattle Campus Football team in Seattle, Washington made the following profit:

• Men's Team Expenses: $29,136,569
• Men's Team Revenue: $66,941,640
• Men's Team Profit: $37,805,071

 

[socaljim242]

I don't think other sports should be canceled or anything like that. I dont think they should give the players 100k or 50k or 25k a year but even 5k put away in an account for when they leave is fair. They are used to prop up all the other sports. Everyone involved in college footballs getting rich. If UA can give UCLA 280 million for 15 years it's not impossible to do something more than exactly what every other sport gets even though they dont bring in a dime.

 

[WizardHawk]

Just as I thought. You can't physically name the programs that should be cut to give windfall amounts of cash to amateur athletes.

Do a bit more digging than just the bottom line of football as I suggested. Quick search located a couple of articles saying how much the football revenue is going toward the other programs.

football revenues fund 85 percent of a department budget that sustains the 17 other varsity sports and facilities

Obviously Basketball is the only other sport that brings in any kind of real money.

Which exact programs are you going to throw away to give kids more money. This is the ONLY option to get what you think is fair.

 

[RegentDenali]

3-star OLB Ariel Ngata (Folsom, CA) has committed to Washington. His offers included Boise St, BYU, Oklahoma, Zona, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon St, Utah, and WSU.

 

[RegentDenali]

Huskies just cracked the top 20 for recruiting rankings on 247 and 15th on Scout. It's early, but damn Petersen and crew are putting together another great looking class.

Got to back it up with 8+ wins this year and keep the apple cup in Montlake where it always belongs.

Woof!!!! Woof!!! Woof!!!

 

[socaljim242]

Just as I thought. You can't physically name the programs that should be cut to give windfall amounts of cash to amateur athletes.

Do a bit more digging than just the bottom line of football as I suggested. Quick search located a couple of articles saying how much the football revenue is going toward the other programs.



Obviously Basketball is the only other sport that brings in any kind of real money.

Which exact programs are you going to throw away to give kids more money. This is the ONLY option to get what you think is fair.

I can't name programs because they dont need to be cut. Good lord. UCLA just got 280 million just from UA. You mean they cant put away 500k a year without making the golf team play without balls? Somehow they can build new stadiums pay coaching staffs 5-7 million a year but booo hooo the baseball team can't play if just a bit is used on the actual players bringing in all the money.

 

[trojanfan12]

When you heard stories not long about about kids in the football program going hungry out of season because they couldn't afford to eat and yet can't take on extra jobs because of the time their program takes up all year long of course you want to see that changed. When kids get injured and face life long medical expenses it should be entirely paid for no questions asked for the rest of their life.

These are the 2 things that I think need to be fixed first. I think most schools are working on the food issue. I believe USC now has "training table" year round. The medical is a huge deal, imo, as well. Football takes a toll on the body and virtually of all of these guys will have some sort of physical issues. Some may not show up until years later.

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't think other sports should be canceled or anything like that. I dont think they should give the players 100k or 50k or 25k a year but even 5k put away in an account for when they leave is fair.

From the way I understand it, the problem isn't that they leave the program with no money in the bank. Heck, most students leave school with a lot of debt. These players are getting a free education and leave school with no debt (at least as far as student loans).

The problem seems to be that they don't have money while they are in school. As has been pointed out, they can't take a part time job because football takes up too much of their time year round. So, they often don't have the money to go out with friends for a pizza or take their girlfriend to the movies.

I like the idea of giving them a set amount, maybe the equivalent of minimum wage, so that they can have a little "walking around money." Many students take on campus jobs while in school. Perhaps, at least during the off season, they're football training, etc. can be treated like their on campus job for which they can be paid a minimum wage level stipend?

 

[socaljim242]

From the way I understand it, the problem isn't that they leave the program with no money in the bank. Heck, most students leave school with a lot of debt. These players are getting a free education and leave school with no debt (at least as far as student loans).

The problem seems to be that they don't have money while they are in school. As has been pointed out, they can't take a part time job because football takes up too much of their time year round. So, they often don't have the money to go out with friends for a pizza or take their girlfriend to the movies.

I like the idea of giving them a set amount, maybe the equivalent of minimum wage, so that they can have a little "walking around money." Many students take on campus jobs while in school. Perhaps, at least during the off season, they're football training, etc. can be treated like their on campus job for which they can be paid a minimum wage level stipend?

It's complicated I understand that. I get the whole they get a free education but like I said previously how many of them are actually college material? Just because you let them in and send them to class and we think it's great and people pay a ton to go there that they should just be grateful. But in reality many of them where admitted into college because they can play football with no chance of taking advantage of it. And I don't mean they are stupid. I just mean they could have just spent most of their youth playing football and practicing football or they are just wired for other things like hands on work and would do better with technical training that writing papers. So telling me they leave school with no debt means little because they would have never even gone to college with their grades and so wouldn't have had that debt.
The NCAA is so paranoid that their cash cow will be taken away they hold on to these rules as if life depended on it. A student on a music scholarship can play in a band on the weekends and have no affect on his eligibility. A football player is limited on what they are allowed to do for extra money.

 

[Olyduck]

I can't name programs because they dont need to be cut. Good lord. UCLA just got 280 million just from UA. You mean they cant put away 500k a year without making the golf team play without balls? Somehow they can build new stadiums pay coaching staffs 5-7 million a year but booo hooo the baseball team can't play if just a bit is used on the actual players bringing in all the money.

That made me think how much do the schools supply vs how much does the golfer pay for themselves in terms of shoes, clubs, bags, balls?

 

[socaljim242]

That made me think how much do the schools supply vs how much does the golfer pay for themselves in terms of shoes, clubs, bags, balls?

Good question. Most golf players come from affluent families. One of my sons friends brother is at UCLA on the golf team and they are middle class. I'm guessing the clubs might be their own personal clubs but everything else the school takes care of. I played basketball with a USC player when I was in the marines when I was home on leave and everything he wore was USC gear that he got for practice.

 

[wazzu31]

I agree it's not black and white. I know i'd love the free education but lets get real how many of these players have any business being in college? I have a friend whos kid has had a 4.0 since freshman in high school and got rejected to many schools yet some guy who can't do basic math is allowed into graduate school because he can play football. So giving them this free education is like giving me free medical school. I don't belong there .

The they don't deserve to be there is a different conversation. My thing I'd athletes exploit the NCAA just as much by using third facilities for free to get them ready for the NFL, use the free exposure, free medical staff etc. RGIII never would've sniffed an endorsement deal had he gone to the CFL and got paid but no exposure.

I'm not saying it's 100% fair but nothing in live is, which since you don't believe most SEC players should even attend school, they need at least one lesson.

 

[trojanfan12]

It's complicated I understand that. I get the whole they get a free education but like I said previously how many of them are actually college material? Just because you let them in and send them to class and we think it's great and people pay a ton to go there that they should just be grateful. But in reality many of them where admitted into college because they can play football with no chance of taking advantage of it. And I don't mean they are stupid. I just mean they could have just spent most of their youth playing football and practicing football or they are just wired for other things like hands on work and would do better with technical training that writing papers. So telling me they leave school with no debt means little because they would have never even gone to college with their grades and so wouldn't have had that debt.
The NCAA is so paranoid that their cash cow will be taken away they hold on to these rules as if life depended on it. A student on a music scholarship can play in a band on the weekends and have no affect on his eligibility. A football player is limited on what they are allowed to do for extra money.

I agree with the bold, which is why I would rather see them paid a minimum wage level stipend, at least in the off season, than have money put away in some account that they get when they leave school. The reason some of these guys take money now, is because they need money now. Money in some account that they can't access until they graduate, doesn't do anything for them today.

Also, I understand that some of these players wouldn't be in college and getting a degree if they couldn't play football. But once they graduate, they can still go out and get a job and they will have a degree and likely some connections that will give them some advantages that they wouldn't otherwise have. I would also have no issue if the school had a job placement program set up to assist them after they graduate.

 

[WizardHawk]

I can't name programs because they dont need to be cut. Good lord. UCLA just got 280 million just from UA. You mean they cant put away 500k a year without making the golf team play without balls? Somehow they can build new stadiums pay coaching staffs 5-7 million a year but booo hooo the baseball team can't play if just a bit is used on the actual players bringing in all the money.

Investments in mega facilities is an arms race, not a luxury expense. If you don't do these things you can't keep up with the other schools and don't end up making the same profits. You MUST spend on your programs to compete. It really isn't optional. So suggesting they have money for the players if they just don't spend huge amounts on facilities shows a total lack of understanding of how this all works.

UW knows they must upgrade their basketball facilities if they want to get back to competing at a high level and yet cannot afford to do so. That upgrade would ultimately bring them in more money and yet they can't swing it right now and don't have plans on the front burner to do so.

If they can't afford to spend money in areas that would lead to bringing in more profits then where exactly is the money you believe they have lying around in fat stacks to give the kids?

Again, just making general statements that they must have a lot of money because of the revenue brought in by football isn't good enough to substantiate your argument. You need details.

They have come a long way and mostly have it right IMO. Give them enough so they aren't broke in the off season, but not enough to go buying expensive toys, and you are probably as high as I'd be willing to see it go. They don't need or deserve to make windfall amounts of money off of college athletics.