wake me up when #1 enters.....
Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread
- Status
Cant guard anyone
Ok let me ask you this. Let's assume these football and basketball teams are all losing money. Fine. Let's say the economy goes south this year and the company you work for loses money. Are you going to return your salary for the year to your employer? I mean, the company lost money right? So why should you get paid?
And before the players could get NIL, I also assume everyone who is complaining about NIL now was also posting about how insane it was that coaches were getting paid more and more every season while their teams lost money, right?
Attachments
So it’s better that these kids generate millions for the University and get no compensation?
Is it better we return to the Groce/Weber years where the “pimping” still happen but it happened behind the scene? All the while our program took the “high road” and refused to compensate players due to “rules” and we were perpetually on the bubble as a result?
Money has always changed hands in college sports.
Your assessment that the fan experience is destroy is objectively false as the seasons after NIL have become some of the best in terms of rating and viewership.
That 4.6M profit includes ~55M of donations. Is a company in the black if they depend on charity for ~35% of their expenses?
That dude’s game is UGLY. Wow! I mean he gets results but very awkward.
But what's happening right now is exactly not what the Olympic system ever was and that was the goal. The floodgates were opened too early. And so far, no one has bothered to close them.
A company exists to make profit for shareholders.
A college athletics department does not have shareholders and does not have the same profit motives as a private company, and therefore it is not surprising when instead of maintaining a profit it reinvests its revenue back into its athletic programs.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Right, but that profit still needs to be there initially in order for you to reinvest it. Kind of hard to reinvest $0. I mean, I get what you are saying, but I also understand what grue2 is saying. It's a shell game of sorts, lol.
Actually I sort of did for years. Most of my pay was in company stock.
The real question you seem to be asking is what is fair pay. Given that the companies (universities) rarely, if ever, make money, I'd argue that the full scholarship ride, and enough of a stipend to cover books, etc. with a bit left over for a meal out is fair for "revenue" sports. Maybe 10k/year. For non revenue sports (currently only men's FB and BB), anything they get is over payment.
If the deal was "we pay expenses and then split profits", I'd be fine with the athletes getting 50%, or even 80% of the profits. I don't think there will be any. I'd want it to be done to corporate standards, not the current student fee subsidies, cheap loans from the university, etc..
If boosters with more ego than sense want to throw money at them, they should take it. I expect that the NCAA tournament is going to look a lot like this years going forward. While there were some good games, I found the tournament as a whole lackluster. I probably watched 40% fewer games this year than in the past.
wettsten
- Chicago
i'm tired of this narrative where someone criticizes the current system and another assumes they want the old system back. can't one criticize the current system without wanting the old system? it ain't coming back and we all know it. there are more options out there and i think we just haven't found the right balance.
You're right and they're wrong! Barnhizer is gritty, plays good D, rebounds and can pass! The perfect 6th man, at least. AND he provides more Senior leadership
You seem to have avoided the question. The previous poster claimed UIUC sports were in the black. Is a company in the black if they depend on charity for 35% of their expenses?
If you want to actually discuss things, okay. If you want to beat a pre-determined drum, just say so and I'll drop out of the conversation. I'm open to students athletes being paid fair value. The question is what is fair value. If, it is profit sharing, that value would appear to be 0 as there is no profit. In an extreme (which I don't buy), you could claim a percentage of that $4.6M should be divided among all the athletes in Men's FB and BB.
Agreed! Can shoot, plays D, rebounds, can pass And PROVIDES EVEN MORE SENIOR LEADERSHIP! He's gritty!
Strawmen. Never suggested going back to the old system. Would not expect that, and it could and should not happen., Simply projecting out what could likely happen under the current model.
These kids did receive SOME compensation in the past. A tuition/housing/meals cost - free degree (if they chose to earn it) and the increased lifetime opportunities and earnings it generated for the 95% who do not go on to play professionally. Was that commensurate with what they helped the Universities generate? In most cases, no. Change was inevitable and the NCAA failed to acknowledge that and as a result their hand was forced; and they have been woefully inept in catching up and have abdicated that responsibility now to the conferences and congress. The current system as it stands rewards chasing the almighty dollar with no restrictions and no requirement to fulfill their obligation in some cases (Sky Clark?).
How long will fans and "NIL" donors continue to bankroll it? "NIL" was established to "allow athletes to receive compensation for their name, image, and likeness but not to compensate them for athletic participation or achievement." That is directly from the NCAA. Is that what is really happening today?
Last edited:
I only stated what was in the article, it's not like I made that up. And, to answer your question, for that fiscal year, the accountants decided that they were in the black. TBH, I looked that up because I thought you were right - I was surprised at what it said. I don't like the way things are now, but the way things were wasn't right either. I would guess that that is what many think. I don't see the future, like it is now,, being a good thing. I also don't think the NCAA has the wisdom nor the legal ability to fix it. I would rather government stay out of things, but legislation might be the only way to enforce sanity to the system.
You aren't getting it. Athletic departments are not for profit companies. There are definitionally no profits. If the revenues exceed expenditures, they just increase expenditures to match, because they aren't trying to make a profit. When revenues go up, they spend more. When revenues go down.. well they haven't really gone in that direction so who knows what they'd do.
And booster contributions are a part of that. Boosters aren't stepping in because they want to keep athletic departments in the black. They're stepping in because they want them to spend more on improving the teams. It's not like contributions follow the expenditures. It's the other way around. Expenditures go up with increased contributions.
Right but it's like this: if you are a non-profit and your revenue doubles, and you give your employees raises and spend the rest of the money on doing more of whatever your nonprofit does than you have ever done before and at the end of the year break even...did you have a good year or a bad one financially?
Just a guess, but thinking he ends up in Carolina
- Status