NCAA OKs Pay-for-Play Rule for Student Athletes

The NCAA board approved a measure allowing conferences to provide up to $2,000 in spending money, or what the NCAA calls the full cost-of-attendance, while insisting it is not pay-for-play. Schools in the six BCS-affiliated conferences are expected to move quickly and provide the additional funding, but because of Title IX rules it may prove too costly for most non-BCS schools.

7 months ago bluesyourdaddy 17 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I figured that anything they did with the pay-for-play thing would vastly favor the BCS schools

and I was right

by pack_fan on Oct 27, 2011 4:05 PM PDT reply actions

I'll backtrack on this some

it could certainly be worse, but I would have liked for them to find a way for it to be more equal across all FBS schools (not an easy solution, I admit). I’ve supported increasing the amount for student athletes overall, but just hoped there could be a way to not favor one school over another.

by pack_fan on Oct 27, 2011 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm not a fan of this but...

How does this favor one school over another? I means everyone has the same opportunity to do this just like everyone could be D1 or FBS but some can’t afford the scholarship limits and additional sport costs. This is just another road block between certain schools splitting away from others…D1 split off from D2/3, FBS split away from FCS, and now BCS is splitting away from them…this was bound to happen sooner than later hopefully the MWC and CUSA schools can afford to hang with the big boys but I see the MAC/WAC/SBC eventually getting left behind…

"We are who we are. People say what they say. The outcome is the outcome. We are proud of ourselves." -DeLoss Dodds 9/21/2011

by TowerPower on Oct 27, 2011 4:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

I agree

and now that they once again have their foot in the door on the money agle, the “pay” will rise over the next few years to exclude all but the wealthiest schools from being able to compete with the “spending money.” There was a reason the corrupting influence of cash payments to athletes was put into place in the first place.

Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another.---Vince Lombardi

by bluesyourdaddy on Oct 27, 2011 5:29 PM PDT up reply actions

Well, it favors those who can afford to increase the amount they put into scholarships

I get your point, but not every school has the amount of money others do. This proposal is different than a school that can afford to have better facilities, etc. since now its money paid directly to the student. Money in someones pocket goes pretty far in convincing someone to come to your school, even without promises of playing time or what have you. I don’t think its an abhorrent policy and its something the smaller schools may be able to work with, its just that I would have rather a policy with the smaller schools in mind were come up with.

by pack_fan on Oct 27, 2011 7:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Like I said I agree with you

But this is how the bigger schools legally split away from the smaller ones the only difference between FBS and FCS besides the stupid attendance requirements that are rarely enforced is an extra 22 scholarships for both men and women…that separation is the same as this but it’s just a different way of doing it. The smallest non AQ schools will get hosed just like FCS ones did especially those barely making ends meet as is, it may take a couple of years but eventually it will happen…

"We are who we are. People say what they say. The outcome is the outcome. We are proud of ourselves." -DeLoss Dodds 9/21/2011

by TowerPower on Oct 27, 2011 7:47 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

yeah I get you

and I could certainly see that happening. The policy also encourages that if you plan on giving the extra money to your student-athletes, that your conference mates be doing the same so you aren’t giving yourself a recruiting advantage against them. I’m not sure how that is enforced (if at all), but I guess its a part of it. That will make it tough for the smaller conferences too if one school can do it but the majority can’t.

by pack_fan on Oct 27, 2011 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions

This is a terrible rule for the NCAA to enact...

It just adds more separation from the haves and have nots. This could be the beginning of the end for amateur sports at the college level as we know it.

by LoboJo on Oct 27, 2011 7:03 PM PDT reply actions

Is this just college football and basketball or all college sports?

Public Enemy #1 and enjoying every minute of it. Tapology.

by wolfmanshowlforever on Oct 27, 2011 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Has to have equal funding for women

Per title 9…it will be conference by conference most assume it will be for fb bb and either baseball lacrosse or hockey depending on each conference region plus offsetting title nine requirements but nothing is offical…

"We are who we are. People say what they say. The outcome is the outcome. We are proud of ourselves." -DeLoss Dodds 9/21/2011

by TowerPower on Oct 27, 2011 7:38 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

It depends on the sport apparently

this from rgj.com:

However, the NCAA legislation says the full cost of attendance would only apply to head-count sports (football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball, women’s tennis, volleyball, gymnastics) and athletes in equivalency sports who are on a full ride. That figure at Nevada is more like 125 student-athletes. Multiply that by the $2,000 and the cost is still $250,000 annually.

link

So those sports seem to be the required sports if you are going to increase it for men’s football/basketball. This part of the blog piece was after giving the figure for increasing it for all their full scholarship athletes, which was around $424,000. So it seems there is literature written into the policy that helps alleviate the costs if the school doesn’t have the finances, which is helpful for what I was talking about above.

by pack_fan on Oct 27, 2011 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions

if you want to watch an entertaining game houston vs rice is on

59-34, 4 minutes left in 3rd quarter. Case Kennum has 7 TD passes and they are about to score again. he just broke graham harrells al-time NCAA record for td passes. he has 137 and counting.

Public Enemy #1 and enjoying every minute of it. Tapology.

by wolfmanshowlforever on Oct 27, 2011 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions

make that 8 TD passes. i think he has over 500 yards of passing.

rice is still scoring which is why they keep Keenum in. 8-0 after this game and they have two more cupcakes to make 10-0 until they meet SMU. he passed timmy chang last week for yardage. they said one more record he will break but i’m not sure what it is.

Public Enemy #1 and enjoying every minute of it. Tapology.

by wolfmanshowlforever on Oct 27, 2011 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions