By Eleanor

July 26, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

They should receive spending money. They are not allowed to work and yes their free education is great but show me a college kid that doesn’t like to take a girl out to the movies; go grab something to eat with friends; etc. At least give them some spending money - because face it - the colleges are making a bundle off their sports - especially football and also to a degree the other sports.

By i hope not

July 26, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

how much is tuition to a major university? more per year than a lot of people make in a year, i’m sure.

By TheBlogger

July 26, 2008 5:47 PM | Link to this

Here is a solution:

Allow each college to have a “minor league”. A football player can go to the minor league representing UGA (for example) without being an official student. Therefore, the football player can be paid and everyone is happy. Each college division should have a salary cap per school.

UGA can also still offer scholarships to football players that do want an education in exchange for playing football. The same NCAA rules can apply to these students.

By StraightJacket

July 26, 2008 6:12 PM | Link to this

The slope is too slippery with these crazy ideas of compensating NCAA athletes.

The answer is simple: No. NO! A THOUSAND TIMES, NO!

-SJ

By YELLOWJACKETS REQUIRED

July 26, 2008 6:42 PM | Link to this

I think we need to approach this on an individual basis. If a school can’t get the quality recruits, then PAY some better ones to come. Just like at Georgia Tech, everybody knows we suck so we should be able to offer money to better players to come to Tech.

I think that’s fair!

By Kim

July 26, 2008 6:58 PM | Link to this

By all means, NO. Title lX will make Universities pay all athletes in all sports and many schools now are not making budget as it is. Many schools will just drop athletics and if you think ticket prices and donation levels are high now, start paying the kids. They at least get to eat meals and don’t have to live off of ramen noddles like I did………….and I didn’t have date money either.

By Barnack Frombama

July 26, 2008 6:59 PM | Link to this

How can the AJC even run a story by boyce watkins? This guy is a nut on ALL accounts. Basically says that colleges are a “Plantation System” that undercuts a players worth. I guess a scholarship is worth nothing, huh dr watkins?

Reading between the lines, watkins wants players to get paid, basically because he knows most won’t finish school OR make it to the NFL.

Now, if when a player signs with a college he were GUARANTEED an NFL slot somewhere after 4 years he would be satisfied.

By John Lunsford

July 26, 2008 7:12 PM | Link to this

I think all student athletes should rec. some Equal payment, just as I received when I was an adv. ROTC student at GA Tech-1960’s, As I understand the rules, it is basically impossible for athletes to have a jobs-Spending money, plus they do not have the time. while in college I lived in the dorm with some of the athletes and saw what a time consuming activity College sports were. since then I have also felt the athletes should have lighter school loads and More Time to Graduate

By Noah.Dreams

July 26, 2008 8:52 PM | Link to this

The question that just begs to be answered is why don’t colleges provide long term disability insurance to student athletes?

When a paralyzed athlete has to depend upon the charity of strangers to survive after an injury then we need to re-examine our priorities.

By getthepicture

July 26, 2008 10:04 PM | Link to this

Many people say they should be paid because they can’t have jobs to earn spending money. I realize it’s big business at some schools, but the bottom line is this…the full scholarship athlete is receiving an education for FREE and he/she has a CHOICE - they can refuse to accept the full scholarship and go to school like every other student, paying their way through school, and working to earn extra money OR they can accept the full ride to college & figure out a way to earn some spending money.

By macc

July 26, 2008 10:42 PM | Link to this

There are some very good points on both sides of this issue, but the bottom line is the NCAA and schools still benefit more than anyone. A student athletes need for additional money or the temptation of someone offering them money, has been at the root of a many NCAA violations. So much to the fact that high school coaches and anyone with any level of influence is getting compensated to get a player to commit, so don’t use the excuse it would open the NCAA and schools to more fraud and dirt.

By macc

July 26, 2008 10:54 PM | Link to this

Yes, there is a free education involved here, but every year the NCAA reports on the graduation rate of these student athletes. Based on that same report, some schools face a reduction in scholarships they can offer due to the graduation rates. Does anyone wonder why these rates end up being so low?? Tough to focus on education when you are REQUIRED to spend 80-90% of your time on the field, watching film, or in the weight room. Not a real model for academic success huh??

By macc

July 26, 2008 11:02 PM | Link to this

Let’s clear one thing up. Schools would have no problem generating stable revenue from their athletics program if they used the revenue properly. I think most schools would be amazed at their accounts when they stop adding on to stadiums that they can’t even currently sell out. Where’s the logic in this ? Keeping up with the Jones’ will eventually take you to the poor house !

By macc

July 26, 2008 11:13 PM | Link to this

Make no mistake, there is a solution to paying athletes. If the NCAA and schools can figure out a way to divide up millions of dollars in TV revenue, then I am sure they can develop a scale of compensation for these athletes and for those who say they can take the free education or make them pay for it. I say fine..then stop telling a high school player he cannot go to the NBA draft until after a year of college and congress should look at making a change to when players can enter the draft.

By macc

July 26, 2008 11:23 PM | Link to this

Nobody feels the scholarship is worth nothing, but let’s get real. There is a large percentage of athletes getting offered scholarships to schools that their chances of succeeding in their classrooms are slim. They would have never been accepted if it were not for the fact they can dribble a ball etc. So they bend and brake rules getting them in only setting them up for failure. We all know what happens when a players is of no use to the program. its amazing how quick things change !!

By Jim

July 26, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this

Athletes ARE paid. They are provided with the opportunity of a free college education which is worth 10s of thousands of dollars. As a parent who has paid for three such educations, I would love for someone else to shoulder that burden. What part of this deal does not anyone understand?

By macc

July 26, 2008 11:35 PM | Link to this

Here is “THE PLAN”. All athletes receive a base pay (even non-revenue)(All schools same base pay). Schools have the right to offer additional cash compensation to an athlete, regulated by a salary cap per program. The school agrees to pay a royalty fee for things such as increased sales of a players jersey or use of his likeness in a video game. All of these funds would be placed into a interest gaining trust fund that can only be accessed upon graduation or separation from the school.

By CPT

July 27, 2008 12:44 AM | Link to this

Brand acts like it would be UNFAIR to pay the football players in the SEC and not the volleyball players in the MAC. Isn’t that how it works in our world - people are compensated differently based on the value of their skills? The biggest problem I see is eliminating the “college life” that keeps the sport relatively pure. I think we should pay them what they are worth, but only give out what is needed and put the rest in trust to be paid upon graduation.

By CPT

July 27, 2008 12:46 AM | Link to this

Brand acts like it would be UNFAIR to pay the football players in the SEC and not the volleyball players in the MAC. Isn’t that how it works in our world - people are compensated differently based on the value of their skills? The biggest problem I see is eliminating the “college life” that keeps the sport relatively pure. I think we should pay them what they are worth, but only give out what is needed and put the rest in trust to be paid upon graduation.

By KJ

July 27, 2008 3:28 AM | Link to this

LOL @ the Boston College player whining about “giving up a big chunk of his life”. Most of us should be so lucky as to enjoy the lifestyle of the D1 football player.

By Tech Grad

July 27, 2008 6:58 AM | Link to this

What’s the difference? Tech players get paid and they still can’t play…any sport!

By TDP

July 27, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

There are basically no revenue producing sports except football and basketball. If equal payments are mandated, more sports will be dropped at most schools because they’re already in the red financially. If paying for “top” players is allowed, the competitive landscape will change dramatically. Big football and basketball programs will increase dues required to purchase tickets in order to fund contracts paid to HS stars. When that bill comes, count me out.

By GTforthemoney

July 27, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this

If the players are to be paid, let it come from the NCAA instead of the college. That way the rules for each college can stay in place. The cost would not come for the individual school, but from the organization its self. Each player could get a certain amount per game for the full college experience. But then again, if the parents aren’t paying for the education, let them pay for the entertainment I like the idea of long term disability insurance to student athletes.

By common sense

July 27, 2008 8:07 AM | Link to this

I am totally against paying an athlete. As it has already been stated, a free education is payment. But one thing no one as mentioned is the on the job training these athletes are getting that prepares them to go to the next level. How much would it cost to get the coaching, knowledge, experience, nutritional and medical care all these athletes are getting in their sport if they had to pay for it? For football, the cost for this service would easily surpass the cost of the education alone.

By TDP

July 27, 2008 8:08 AM | Link to this

The NFL is the cheapskate in this mess. Baseball has true minor leagues that allow high school athletes to go pro immediately. Other than a ridiculous freshman year rule that will soon have to be abandoned, basketball has the same option (so there’s really no reason to offer money to basketball players in college). The NFL would build a minor league if they didn’t realize the product would suck.

By jh

July 27, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

My Dad played for Wofford College in the late 40’s(Football) and they used to get Laundry money of $15 a month along with their schlorship.

In today’s money I think it would be fair to give each student athletic a base amount of money to go to the movies, get a pizza, etc.

It should be the same amount for everyone. All sports included.

By the way Wofford was pretty good back in those days as they won at Auburn 19-14!

By Dawgtime

July 27, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this

Let me contemplate the suggestion, free tuition, free meals, free tutoring, free books/supplies, grading modifications, prestige, free housing, free promotions, demigod status, and easier college acceptance. Hmmmm, just to play less than 15 games a year that kids play in the backyard for free. OK, you will have to learn to manage your time just like all college students. Others work while I practice. Sounds like a good deal to me. Oh I forgot, thousands of other kids would kill to swap places. Sadly, collegiate sports have become big business. Yes, I realize that most of the athletes cannot maintain a job because of time restraints. Suggestion, instead of getting into fights at the bars, maybe they should get a job at the bar since they are already there. We have become an enabling society that constantly looks for excuses. No one makes you sign a scholarship. It doesn’t matter if a kid is poor and socially disadvantaged. Many regular students come from the same situations and they are not being paid. The misguided belief is that if you sign a scholarship then you will make a professional team. Get a clue. When a school gives you a scholarship, you are being offered a free ride to the best years of your life. No, you don’t go to college to smoke dope, get into fights, and become above the other students. You go to school to learn and to obtain a degree. In reality, a scholarship, offers a poor kid a chance to change his or her life forever via education and not a basketball or football. No one owes you anything in life. Yes, the actions of the players earn the schools a great deal of money. That helps pay for the free ride that the players receive. In reality, the players are being paid to go to school. If you don’t believe it, take that athlete off scholarship and let him or her pay their own way through school. I bet they would be begging for the free ride. In truth, I don’t have a problem with giving athletes spending money due to the time restraints placed upon them, but to be fair, the same should be offered to all of the students. If you do not believe a double standard exist, ask an athlete what they had to achieve in in terms of a GPA and test schools to obtain entrance into the school, then ask a regular student. No, it is no one’s fault that the kid grew up with a distain for school and the delusions of being a professional athlete. Stop making excuses and make these kids accountable. We wonder why so many professional athletes are thugs. Hmmmmm.

By Black and White

July 27, 2008 8:50 AM | Link to this

Pay Remove their amateur status and requirement to enroll in classes
OR
No Pay Keep the status quo

By Mike

July 27, 2008 9:05 AM | Link to this

If the video game companies are going to use likenesses of real college athletes in their games, the athletes should receive a royalty just like the pros do.

By Common Sense

July 27, 2008 9:08 AM | Link to this

Unbelievable.

A) These college kids that think they deserve to be paid are forgetting that they have an option: TURN PRO if you think you are that good!

B) People completely forget the infrastructure (fan base, stadiums, other facilities, etc.) that someone other than the CURRENT student athlete paid for. The Current student athlete should consider himself lucky to have the opportunity to compete on a stage that someone else built for him.

By Kent N

July 27, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

Anyone who thinks they should get paid are NuTS. You get a free education and so on and so on. If you go to college for an education you get one. If you go only as a stepping stone to the pros then you get stepped on. If Im on the deans list my very first day of law school should I get paid an endorsement from a Law firm? No! You will get paid just like everyone else when they finish school ! Keep it that way !

By james

July 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

No, because it’s not fair to those who don’t excel in athletics. I’m not getting paid to go to school, so why in the hell should they? Need money? Get a weekend or summer job. It’s not fair that students should get paid just because of their athletic ability.

By WOW

July 27, 2008 1:27 PM | Link to this

You all do realize that the scholarships are year to year…right? Even though they are told it’s 4 years they are renewble each year.

By FL DAWG

July 27, 2008 2:08 PM | Link to this

Who should pay?

How much Should they pay?

When do the Student Athletes get paid?

Perhaps the NCAA should pay a per week or per monthly stipened equal to $30 per week. This would cover a pizza or a movie and also help teach the student athlete finacial responsibilty.

If a students likeness is used in a game then they should be entitled to receive compensation. Perhaps not while in school, but they should have an estate established for them. If the value of the estate is greater t

By FL DAWG

July 27, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

If the value of the estate is greater than what the NCAA paid the student athlete then they should repay the NCAA.

If the NCAA pays one athlete then all should receive the same amount. All of the athletes are subject to the same rules. The game companies should only pay those that are used in their games.

By Rabun Dawg

July 27, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this

Pay whom, only the revenue producing sports such as basketball and football? What about all the others who also put in a lot of time outside of the classroom. Do they get no consideration? Tennis,golf, baseball , gymnastics, etc., etc., they also work long and hard to try to achieve championship goals! Where do you draw the line on this idea? If you pay them, then consider them professionals, and then they do not even have to attend classes. This will be the ruination of college sports.

By P Dawg

July 27, 2008 7:57 PM | Link to this

Face it people, college athletes (especially football and basketball players) already get special treatment. I doubt very seriously that these athletes don’t get to go to the movies or dinner. They are having the times of their lives as college athletes. Look at what Matt Ryan had to say on the subject about his time at BC. Ther is no doubt that they make the university a lot of money but the school provided the vehicle for their education and ,for many of them, a fortune in professional sports.

By dave

July 27, 2008 8:36 PM | Link to this

College players are paid. Packages include portions or all of tuition, books, fees, tutoring, housing, meal plans. They may apply for federal and state grants and loans like any other students if desired. Grants are based on need, Pell and work study programs. Loans are the same for all students. Informed research indicates that athletes are in better financial positions than the majority of students on university campuses.

By Frank Lane

July 27, 2008 8:50 PM | Link to this

I think “no.” In addition to the free education, they get exposure and a chance to exit school with the kind of multi-million contracts that no one else in their class is going to get, no matter how smart. Without college, many highly paid pro players would have never seen the light of day.

They are accruing equity every day they are in school. Even if they never play pro, they can always say they played and Georgia, and that adds to their resume forever.

By GLENN SMITH

July 27, 2008 11:49 PM | Link to this

IF THE PLAYERS DO NOT THINK THAT RECEIVING A 40,000 TO 60,000 THOUSAND SCHOLARSHIP IS GETTING PAID THEN LET THEM NOT PLAY OR PAY IT THEM SELF.

By BobDog

July 28, 2008 9:49 AM | Link to this

If you follow Watkins’ argument, high school football players should also be compensated because their coaches are paid and they generate revenue that funds most of the other athletic programs at a school.

With that said, a small stipend, what I think they used to call “laundry money”, for all athletes would be worth considering. But even that would be incredibly expensive and unafordable by many schools.

By Nope

July 28, 2008 9:54 AM | Link to this

Not now. Not ever. This is simpler than folks want to make it. Sports will always be better when not cluttered with money and avarice. Once you go down that slippery slope, there is no turning back. The argument will simply evolve into how much and then it is never enough. We’re talking about children hear. Let them get their education for free. Don’t pollute amateur sports with compensation. This argument will never go away because it is human nature to get as much reward as possible.

By Lead dawg

July 28, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

They are paid. They are all offered an education on which there cannot be a value assessed, and which many could not afford on their own. Sometimes the university cannot even force some athletes to accept an education.

Many regular students work full time to earn enough to help fund their education, so why should these people expect anything different.

By ugafaninfl

July 28, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

If you guys think that they don’t get paid you’re crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!

By Wes

July 28, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this

They do get paid with a free education. What does that cost, 100K? The reason it looks bad is becuase of all the money that is spent to field a BCS football team. The Big Ten is beginning it’s own TV network and Nick Saban gets 4 million a year. Where does it stop? Maybe there needs to be a “spending cap” for NCAA teams. That might level things out a little bit.

By Terrell Moore

July 28, 2008 2:37 PM | Link to this

this is stupid, the fact that the schools make BILLIONS of dollars off the backs of these kids, i’m not saying that these kids should get millions of dollars. but they should get something…..lets say your a student/player at a div one school, i don’t care what sport, they could give you 1,000 dollars a month ” stipin ” to carry you through the year, div 2 , 750 a month, div 3 500 a month. does that seem fair to everyone, this is not that difficult,

By R. E. H.

July 28, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

Once you take that jeanie out of the bittle you can’t put it back. Like so many good sounding things on paper this is one that will mushroom like an A-bomb cloud once you begin. On the other hand if done there will be constant squabling because someone gets left out, this doesn’t even consider the women’s programs that must have equal provisions.

By Go to work if you want to get paid

July 28, 2008 5:41 PM | Link to this

I could support some minor spending money but nothing else. Consider that most sports lose money. Basically football and basketball revenue goes to fund the other sports. If these athletes are paid, then we will start to see loss-making sports vanish. Is that what we want?

At GT, athletes got priority on class registration, free tutoring, use of the athletic center, etc. While not huge sums of money, these are nice perks that non-athletes are not entitled.

By Joe

July 28, 2008 6:11 PM | Link to this

Are you kidding?… I am a student and they already get plenty. i love my team, but come on… They get free shoes and clothes and the easiest classes with free tuition, room and board. The schollies alone are a enough. They chose to accept what was offered by the university.

Paying college athletes will ruin the college football sport, not to mention how are you going to pay for the other sports? At places like UT, Penn st., UGA, Ohio st. this might be easy, but it would be unfair to smaller

By Joe

July 28, 2008 6:13 PM | Link to this

Are you kidding?… I am a student and they already get plenty. i love my team, but come on… They get free shoes and clothes and the easiest classes with free tuition, room and board. The schollies alone are a enough. They chose to accept what was offered by the university.

Paying college athletes will ruin the college football sport, not to mention how are you going to pay for the other sports? At places like UT, Penn st., UGA, Ohio st. this might be easy, but it would be unfair to smaller

By Steve

July 29, 2008 7:46 AM | Link to this

Yes- the schools make a fortune of these kids and they are the main attraction.

They SHOULD GET PAID.

By NYJacket

July 29, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

Paying players?

What do you call getting a college education without having to write checks to the school for room, board, fees, books, and tuition?

Most students have to borrow 10’s of thousands of dollars and work part time to attend college.

Many of our armed service members have placed their lives on the line in order to qualify for the GI bill.

Additionally, division I competition gives an 18 year old kid the opportunity to further develop skills that might be valuable to a pr

By GetPaid to go to College? Really?

July 30, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

No, college athletes should never be paid. They already get a free ride, which is every student’s dream. Plus think about how many of these athletes are just cruising through college with easy majors just to play football. Athletes already struggle to get decent grades. If athletes are paid, there will be even less motivation for them to go to class and get the minimum grades required. Have we forgotten that without college there is no college football? Why is this even being discussed?