Penn State will give athletes a $4,000. + stipend | The Boneyard

Penn State will give athletes a $4,000. + stipend

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
11,827
Reaction Score
17,832
That doesn't seem like that much. Aren't other schools like Texas offering $10k? Penn State is a huge school with a massive budget. I would have thought those large B1G schools would be near the top in money offered.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
1,398
Reaction Score
1,508
That doesn't seem like that much. Aren't other schools like Texas offering $10k? Penn State is a huge school with a massive budget. I would have thought those large B1G schools would be near the top in money offered.

reportedly a few B1G schools are offering about half as much (Michigan, MSU, and OSU) nothing from Maryland

Texas is in a financial league of their own, I doubt many other schools can afford $10,000.
 
Last edited:

toadfoot

To live will be an awfully big adventure.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
795
Reaction Score
2,156
Am I the only one astounded, outraged and generally disgusted by this development??? As the parent of a child, who with only very modest financial help from mom & dad, has put himself into debt that reaches easy 6 figures to finance law school I'm more than a little po'd. These student-athletes and I use the word 'student' loosely for many of these athletes, especially in sports like men's football and basketball, are already receiving a free college education. Costs vary of course, sending our son Ian to Connecticut College was ~200k, but even most state universities will run somewhere between 80k - 120k for 4 years. So an education worth 100k isn't enough of a 'stipend'?
Hell, why not just do away with the whole concept of student-athlete. Just pay them 30k a year for 4 years to play a sport. No classes, no degree, just play their sport.
 

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,208
Reaction Score
73,885
Am I the only one astounded, outraged and generally disgusted by this development??? As the parent of a child, who with only very modest financial help from mom & dad, has put himself into debt that reaches easy 6 figures to finance law school I'm more than a little po'd. These student-athletes and I use the word 'student' loosely for many of these athletes, especially in sports like men's football and basketball, are already receiving a free college education. Costs vary of course, sending our son Ian to Connecticut College was ~200k, but even most state universities will run somewhere between 80k - 120k for 4 years. So an education worth 100k isn't enough of a 'stipend'?
Hell, why not just do away with the whole concept of student-athlete. Just pay them 30k a year for 4 years to play a sport. No classes, no degree, just play their sport.
It’s a complex issue with no single solution. NCAA scholarship athletes are already getting paid in the form of a scholarship and meal allowances. Relatively few athletes Men’s Basketball and Football are the only revenue generating sports and funds the entire athletic departments for many university. The entire NCAA budget is funded by the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. The NCAA basketball tournament is a billion dollar property. If you and a few hundred employees are the only labor source in a Multi-Billion company it would not be unreasonable to expect compensation=equal to your labor contribution. A full scholarship (in some cases) is not equal compensation for the revenue generated. Solutions: A) Separate Football and Men’s basketball as business from the university. B) Require Football and Men’s basketball to fund the rest of the university athletics- Title IX. C) Remove the restrictions on all NCAA athletes in terms of their ability to transfer, work and profit from their own likeness. D) Set 1 pay scale for all NCAA athletes (scholarship, stipend, meals) = the same for all schools based on funds generated from athletics. E) Shrink or abolish the NCAA. F) Reduce Mark Emmert’s salary and relook coaching salaries in general.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2013
Messages
636
Reaction Score
1,196
Toadfoot, I'm in agreement with you. In Europe , we laugh about the union between universities and big time athletics in the U.S. They are really not compatible. The vast majority on most teams survives the rigors of academic life through the use of various mechanisms- ranging from o'k to not o'k. Instead, I rec clubs. Each univ or a group of univ can adopt a club. When the season is over these players can enroll as student. Those players who cannot go on to the NFL/NBA after 4 years can finish your educ at the school(s) sponsoring their club. Even with WBB are we seeing an increased number of students with individualized programs. This is a red flag and it goes against the modern univ system.
 

UcMiami

How it is
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
14,056
Reaction Score
46,332
Toad - I tend to agree, and it isn't just the education these athletes are getting, but access to world class coaching, trainers, medical care, and facilities to increase their professional expectations. And that is true for non-revenue sports as well.
And the biggest driver of all the money involved is not the athletes but the universities. Joe's Lumberyard developmental team in Ann Arbor isn't drawing 20,000 fans, University Of Michigan football team is drawing 60,000 even if the team is 8-8, and their millions of grads are watching on TV. That is the real source of all that money. The fans that are built into every school's athletic teams.
 

toadfoot

To live will be an awfully big adventure.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
795
Reaction Score
2,156
Toad - I tend to agree, and it isn't just the education these athletes are getting, but access to world class coaching, trainers, medical care, and facilities to increase their professional expectations. And that is true for non-revenue sports as well.
And the biggest driver of all the money involved is not the athletes but the universities. Joe's Lumberyard developmental team in Ann Arbor isn't drawing 20,000 fans, University Of Michigan football team is drawing 60,000 even if the team is 8-8, and their millions of grads are watching on TV. That is the real source of all that money. The fans that are built into every school's athletic teams.

You raise a excellent point that I had completely overlooked. Not only are these student-athletes getting a free education that would otherwise cost anywhere from $80k to $200k, or even more at elite schools like Stanford or Duke, but they're getting top coaching, trainers, medical care, etc. Truth be told, very very few athletes coming out of high school would be capable of jumping to the NBA, NFL or even MLB without at least a couple of years of the kind of training available at the collegiate level. Hard to put a price on that, but I would say it at least doubles the value of the education itself.

And hjoerring's comment above that, " This is a red flag and it goes against the modern univ system" goes to the heart of my original comment. Our colleges and universities should primarily be institutions of high learning, not minor leagues for professional sports. And I really abhor the idea of paying athletes who are already receiving scholarships and training when the "stipends" being discussed could provide academic scholarships for hundreds of students. The stipend for football players at the University of Texas alone could provide full scholarships for as many as 40 students.
 

KnightBridgeAZ

Grand Canyon Knight
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,232
Reaction Score
8,729
While all of your various comments highlighting the issues surrounding big time college athletics are valid, there are some angles to this that are consistently overlooked. The fact these issues exist is, of course, part of the problem, but never-the-less:

- very few - and I mean very few - college athletes are candidates for pro leagues. And realistically, not very many pro leagues provide much of an income either. Just think about the numbers
- for the athletes in general, in schools that take athletics and athletic commitment by their athletes seriously, it is like having a full time job in addition to going to school (and most student athletes across the board "are" students, based on sheer numbers).
- but athletes are prevented by this time fact and "the rules" from having income to offset things like books, misc. living expenses, etc.

So, in the end, I don't have a problem with a cost of attending school stipend. I agree it is unfair, and am not in the least oblivious to negatives surrounding it, but I do get it.
 
Joined
May 25, 2014
Messages
16
Reaction Score
12
While all of your various comments highlighting the issues surrounding big time college athletics are valid, there are some angles to this that are consistently overlooked. The fact these issues exist is, of course, part of the problem, but never-the-less:

- very few - and I mean very few - college athletes are candidates for pro leagues. And realistically, not very many pro leagues provide much of an income either. Just think about the numbers
- for the athletes in general, in schools that take athletics and athletic commitment by their athletes seriously, it is like having a full time job in addition to going to school (and most student athletes across the board "are" students, based on sheer numbers).
- but athletes are prevented by this time fact and "the rules" from having income to offset things like books, misc. living expenses, etc.

So, in the end, I don't have a problem with a cost of attending school stipend. I agree it is unfair, and am not in the least oblivious to negatives surrounding it, but I do get it.
We can complain all we want about paying football and basketball players, but it is just a matter of time before it occurs. The question is how much can the schools afford.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
563
Guests online
3,908
Total visitors
4,471

Forum statistics

Threads
155,812
Messages
4,032,281
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom