Yeah there are a few non-scholarship people living there so that they can keep up the ruse that it is not an impermissible benefit. To be one of those people you either need to be the child of a generous booster, a "tutor" for the athletes, or a team manager of some kind. It is such an obvious violation but the NCAA has basically been willing to completely ignore it since it isn't cash or cars.
Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread (September 2016)
- Status
Yeah there are a few non-scholarship people living there so that they can keep up the ruse that it is not an impermissible benefit. To be one of those people you either need to be the child of a generous booster, a "tutor" for the athletes, or a team manager of some kind. It is such an obvious violation but the NCAA has basically been willing to completely ignore it since it isn't cash or cars.
Let's be clear. This is not that. This is isolating the revenue sport athletes from the rest of the student body for the purposes of being able to deliver direct financial benefits to them in a format the NCAA allows.
But this is also stripping the college experience from them and putting them under 24/7 surveillance by the athletic department. As "payments" go, it's an extremely expensive and luxurious one, but one that could hardly be better calculated to provide absolutely no long-term benefit of any kind to these kids.
If you're going to do paternalism, do paternalism right. If you're going to treat these players like the emancipated adult labor that they are, do that right. This is the worst of both worlds.
TownieMatt
CU Expat
- Chicago
I get Second and Chalmers' point here though. Schools find so many elaborate ways to dance around paying athletes, why don't we just pay them straight up? There are so many different scenarios that could play out, and ways that could go haywire as well, but I do think there's an argument to be made for just paying players transparently for the service they provide to their university.
Because then they would be employees and that opens up a huge can of worms that the NCAA wants no part of. They do get paid a bit now, with the new "total cost of attendance" stipend. So that is a couple grand, but not enough to stop these types of additional perks.
Leaving the employment law dance (which is slightly more complicated than what you say) to one side, you're right, the ultimate issue is that the NCAA doesn't want to reform itself and there isn't an obvious mechanism to force them to.
Yet.
It is not direct financial benefits. Actually, direct financial benefits is what you are proposing, which will further differentiate revenue sports athletes from the student body. Revenue sports athletes already get stipend and other benefits (e.g., meals, tutoring) not available to the rest of student population. So without going into the legal aspects of managing the payment process (which they won't be able to), providing direct payments, insurance, and lifelong healthcare will just widen the gap. If you do all that, is it the fact that they will live in the same dorm that will equate them with the rest of the student population? C'mon... the gap will get wider, dorm rooms are the least "differentiation" in the scheme you propose.
Furthermore, there is differentiation with respect to dorms and amenities in almost all schools. Some dorms and amenities are better than others. That is a fact. And there is some differentiation on who lives there, whether that is based on seniority, sports, or even academics. For example, quite a few universities have built dorms for their honor programs and students enrolled in them.
As far as the financial aspect, again without going into the management of process or legal (which is a can of warms indeed), the scheme that you propose where you increase direct payments, insurance, healthcare etc. for revenue sports is extremely expensive. Who will pay for that? If athletic departments can's afford to build a $10M dorm for example (which most can't), they will be able to increase direct payments, insurance, healthcare etc. for revenue sports? That is a huge long term expense compared to the $10M. That will further widen the gap on who can afford and who can't, way beyond dorm/amenities differentiation.
Use whatever term you like. It is using money to entice basketball players to ply their trade at the University of Kansas. The NCAA prevents that transfer from taking place in a number of formats, this is one way they do allow.
I'm not referring to a financial separation, I'm referring to a physical separation. A big part of the justification of collegiate amateurism is what the players gain by being in a college environment among their classmates. A big part of the justification of Universities contorting themselves into professional sports factories is that having these sports teams around enhances the vibrancy of their communities. Facilities like this put the lie to both of those notions.
If the "gap" you're referring to is financial (as opposed to popularity or status or whatever), you're forgetting that most of these kids start way WAY behind the vast majority of their rich white kids from the suburbs peers.
The 1970's romantic ideal of college kids struggling to pay rent living in some hovel and eating ramen noodles (but really living maaaaaaaaaaan) is not what college is anymore.
Legislating this wouldn't be super simple, totally agree. But I hope you would agree that the NCAA isn't even really trying right now.
When I say "long term health-care" I am more talking about treatment for any lingering effects of NCAA competition related injuries (which players currently do not receive) as opposed to a lifetime health insurance plan.
But anyway, leave that to one side.
The system is AWASH in money. Illinois is about to spend over $100 million on a Memorial Stadium expansion it doesn't need, right after spending over $100 million on an Assembly Hall renovation it doesn't need. And we're one of the "have nots".
To be clear, I am not and would not advocate for million dollar contracts and free agency type bidding for student athletes. Even if the money were there. The collegiate character of NCAA sports is the reason, IMO, they are by such disproportionate leaps and bounds the most popular minor league sport in the history of humanity.
I think that "collegiate character" means that essentially the players are of college age and are meaningfully college students and stay at a school over a normal college career (the reason I am in favor of transfer restrictions). I also believe both as a legal matter and a moral one that all scholarship athletes in any sports ought to receive the same benefits.
So we're talking like, let's say, a full four(or five)-year commitment, plus some additional ability to complete a degree later on, plus like 5-6 grand a semester, on top of what they already get. And the health care protections I discussed.
Only Power Five schools have that kind of money, so they would have to operate as their own division within the NCAA (or outside of it?)? Good riddance, should have happened years ago. A new big-boy specific enforcement structure with a pared down enforceable rulebook would also be a big help.
This would lead schools to cut all kinds of minor sports, especially men's sports? So be it, let the lesser schools dominate in those sports.
Will there still be cheating? There will always be cheating. Capping the market value of an asset will always lead to a black market. But this is a step in the right direction both in terms of the volume of cheating and the ability to enforce the rules.
The question isn't the money, the question is the will to do what's right by these kids. It's not there at the moment. It may not be even close to there. But storm clouds are gathering on a number of fronts. I hope it ends with the salvation of college sports and not the destruction.
Deleted member 10676
D
Guest
Ex-Illini targets morning recruiting news. Sounds like it might be fun to be Tom Izzo in the near future.
[FONT="]Corey Evans @coreyevans_10 52m52 minutes ago [/FONT]
[FONT="]Top-125 2017 big man Xavier Tillman will announce his college commitment tomorrow at 12:50pm. Down to Purdue, Michigan State, and Marquette[/FONT]
[FONT="]Tillman's CB is 73% MSU; 27% Purdue, with the last 4 going to MSU
[/FONT]
[FONT="]Five-Star 2017 SF Brian Bowen cuts his list to six [/FONT]
[FONT="]
[FONT="]Sean Andrew Scherer @SeanScherer247 [/FONT]
[FONT="]4-star guard Nojel Eastern on official to Michigan State University: "It was a great visit" http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Board/93/Contents/Nojel-Eastern-a-senior-at-Evanston-Ill-Township-took-an-official-[/FONT]
Nojel's CB is 100% MSU.
[FONT="]Corey Evans @coreyevans_10 52m52 minutes ago [/FONT]
[FONT="]Top-125 2017 big man Xavier Tillman will announce his college commitment tomorrow at 12:50pm. Down to Purdue, Michigan State, and Marquette[/FONT]
[FONT="]Tillman's CB is 73% MSU; 27% Purdue, with the last 4 going to MSU
[/FONT]
[FONT="]Five-Star 2017 SF Brian Bowen cuts his list to six [/FONT]
[FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]Sean Andrew Scherer @SeanScherer247 [/FONT]
[FONT="]4-star guard Nojel Eastern on official to Michigan State University: "It was a great visit" http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Board/93/Contents/Nojel-Eastern-a-senior-at-Evanston-Ill-Township-took-an-official-[/FONT]
Nojel's CB is 100% MSU.
Facilities and amenities is a very strong factor in attracting better students, whether they are athletes/recruits or not. People envy the Kansas, Kentucky's, Oregon's, Oklahoma State's, etc. of the world, but it is fact prevalent in many schools, not only in athletics. The reason that we spend (and spent) hundreds of million of dollars on our sports facilities at UI is to attract better student athletes and recruits. And while we still envy the schools that can afford even more, there are many schools that envy UI, because we can afford more than they can. Should the NCAA regulate the improvements in our facilities (let's say the new SFC or Memorial Stadium) because other schools can't afford such improvements? It is definitely an advantage, and one of the primary reasons for doing that is to indeed to entice better athletes and recruits, including versus other schools that can't afford it.
Schools spend hundreds of millions in facilities, but not only in sports. The reason that schools build honor programs with new dorms and facilities for those students, is exactly that, to attract better honor students. The reason that schools spend millions on a new Law, Business, Engineering, Biology, Chemistry, English, Music etc. facility is to attract better students within those fields. Regulating what an organization can build in terms of facilities/amenities is not only difficult, but wrong as well.
Athletes do get extra benefits, as they should. Not different than exceptional music student, honor student, etc. getting more benefits (and often amenities) in their field. It is extremely difficult to differentiate in any field (including sports) and people should be rewarded for their efforts to get there. Whether they are men or women, without racial prejudiced.
I am all for raising benefits for students, including athletes, but when you talk about healthcare, additional stipend, insurance etc., the question is where the money will come from. The NCAA? And you can't do it just for men, you will have to do it for women as well. Healthcare for lingering injuries throughout an athletes' life? With the rising costs of healthcare and insurance, that can amount to literally millions of dollars just for a few athletes in contact sports. Let alone do it for all revenue athletes (men and women), every single year. Spending $10-12M is literally peanuts compared to accounting for those financial increases. And you will have to do it for all schools, not just for Illinois, all schools down the food chain in Div. I.
Schools spend hundreds of millions in facilities, but not only in sports. The reason that schools build honor programs with new dorms and facilities for those students, is exactly that, to attract better honor students. The reason that schools spend millions on a new Law, Business, Engineering, Biology, Chemistry, English, Music etc. facility is to attract better students within those fields. Regulating what an organization can build in terms of facilities/amenities is not only difficult, but wrong as well.
Athletes do get extra benefits, as they should. Not different than exceptional music student, honor student, etc. getting more benefits (and often amenities) in their field. It is extremely difficult to differentiate in any field (including sports) and people should be rewarded for their efforts to get there. Whether they are men or women, without racial prejudiced.
I am all for raising benefits for students, including athletes, but when you talk about healthcare, additional stipend, insurance etc., the question is where the money will come from. The NCAA? And you can't do it just for men, you will have to do it for women as well. Healthcare for lingering injuries throughout an athletes' life? With the rising costs of healthcare and insurance, that can amount to literally millions of dollars just for a few athletes in contact sports. Let alone do it for all revenue athletes (men and women), every single year. Spending $10-12M is literally peanuts compared to accounting for those financial increases. And you will have to do it for all schools, not just for Illinois, all schools down the food chain in Div. I.
No.
I feel like I addressed these things pretty clearly.
Thankfully, Eric LeGrand-type situations are very rare. But players who injure themselves as cost-controlled underpaid labor playing sports for their Universities should be protected from the health consequences of those risks.
The NCAA does provide some catastrophic insurance, but ex-players who didn't make the pros having surgeries on their ailing joints out of their own pocket is an all-too-common occurrence still.
Yet another bizarre post.
Epsilon
M tipping over
- Pdx
Illinithad
- Northeast Missouri
Illinithad
- Northeast Missouri
I was 20 before I started taking college seriously.
My shorts are 20
icengineer
- Southern Illinois
My "not yet broken in" new shorts are 20.
Nothing is more complicated than a can of worms.
Epsilon
M tipping over
- Pdx
icengineer
- Southern Illinois
Can we all stay on Point?
ILLINOIS HOOPS RECRUITING THREAD.
Where are all the Insiders when you need them!:noidea:
- Status