Jump to content

Texas to pay players


McLoofus

Recommended Posts

Ummm....

The Dallas Morning News reports that Texas athletic director Steve Patterson announced yesterday that the University of Texas will begin paying approximately $10,000 to each athlete in response to recent court decisions as well as to cover expenses not otherwise covered by athletic scholarships.

http://www.cornnatio...-new-ncaa-legal

Link to comment
Share on other sites





Oh boy! Gonna kill college athletics! Smaller schools can NOT do this and keep up! I've talked to a D1 women's coach at a smaller D1 school. This is not good for college sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will start scrapping the programs that don't earn money, most football programs any division make money b/c of ticket sales, concessions, and merchandise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will start scrapping the programs that don't earn money, most football programs any division make money b/c of ticket sales, concessions, and merchandise.

Good point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will start scrapping the programs that don't earn money, most football programs any division make money b/c of ticket sales, concessions, and merchandise.

Good point.

How would this square with Title IX?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will start scrapping the programs that don't earn money, most football programs any division make money b/c of ticket sales, concessions, and merchandise.

Good point.

How would this square with Title IX?

Not very well I would think. Texas has opened up a crap can of worms with this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas will soon begin paying each of its student-athletes $10,000 a year to cover cost of attendance and likeness rights, athletics director Steve Patterson revealed at a Big 12 college sports forum in Washington on Tuesday.

The $10,000 will be split evenly, $5,000 apiece, between cost-of-attendance and payment for the University’s use of the athlete’s name and likeness (the figure U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken set in her O’Bannon trial ruling in August). (Cost-of-attendance, of course, varies from school to school and, thus, no uniform figure has been set since schools gave themselves the ability to provide COA stipends.) The total for all UT athletes adds up to $6 million a year.

...

Though it is assumed every Power Five program will be making similar payments to its athletes, the Longhorns are the first school to formally stick their toes in the water.

http://footballscoop...tes-10000-year/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will start scrapping the programs that don't earn money, most football programs any division make money b/c of ticket sales, concessions, and merchandise.

Good point.

How would this square with Title IX?

Sounds like it would comply if I read it correctly....600 athletes so they must be including women's sports too. So the $6M would more or less apply to all public universities....or at least in that range....so it could be $4 or 5M for less expensive areas of the country....more at places like Calif for example. But how many schools have that amount of money available to pay those "living expenses" since at most schools students are hit up for a fee to support athletics already.....and I can't see the student body as a whole being happy to pay even more with tuition going up going everywhere.

As noted by several folks, if this goes through, expect lots of minor sports to be dropped ...male and female to get the numbers down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but this reeks of desperation to me. :jossun:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but this reeks of desperation to me. :jossun:

Somewhat true IMO...since both of the "justifications" are still in litigation and subject to appeal / reversal.

Can't see why Texas feels the need to jump the gun.....and will be interesting to see if the NCAA comes out with a statement on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Power-5 schools have made it clear that they believe such payments are warranted. One possible explanation for Texas making this move is they think it's the right thing to do and want to be a leader on the issue, as opposed to waiting on a group of people (the presidents and ADs) that historically move at a glacial pace. Plus, it's good publicity. Also, the NCAA is going to lose that appeal. It's just a matter of time. The exhaustive opinion written in that case reduces the likelihood that any appellate court (even the 9th Circuit) will reverse.

The NCAA is more concerned with class counsel's petition for $50+ million in attorneys' fees at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, interesting to note that Texas had $165M in revenue in 2013. They had about $147M in expenses (only $10M of which was related to scholarships). Paying an extra $6M isn't cost prohibitive for Texas. Without any additional revenue or private donations, they'd still turn over $12M in profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Power-5 schools have made it clear that they believe such payments are warranted. One possible explanation for Texas making this move is they think it's the right thing to do and want to be a leader on the issue, as opposed to waiting on a group of people (the presidents and ADs) that historically move at a glacial pace. Plus, it's good publicity. Also, the NCAA is going to lose that appeal. It's just a matter of time. The exhaustive opinion written in that case reduces the likelihood that any appellate court (even the 9th Circuit) will reverse.

The NCAA is more concerned with class counsel's petition for $50+ million in attorneys' fees at the moment.

Expect you are right on this....but IMO, the NCAA better be concerned about the continued existence of that body and it's leadership role in scholarship athletics. This kind of thing will shake a lot of schools out of the big time....and even a number of the so-called Power 5 schools will have to take another look at their athletic programs.

The biggest surprise to me is not that it's happening...but that it appears to be happening now.....at least five years ahead of what I expected. At my advancing age, I figured all of this stuff was someone else's problem....but appears that might not be the case any longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AU isn't in a position to pay out 6 million a year to its athletes without it costing the department in other areas. Don't expect any additions to JHS anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$5,000? There are some athletes that will blow through that in a heartbeat. $416 a month will buy lots of trouble for young kids that are not use to handling money.

Other athletes may be less likely to do other things to get funds for themselves and a family they are tying to support, perhaps delaying going into the pros or quitting school to get a job.

Auburn has had payers living off campus and getting a housing allowing that they spent on other things and then they get evicted.

We have also had several players that need money to support a family so they went into the pros a year or two early hurting their draft position. Darvin Adams was in this situation. He left after his junior year just to have some money to support his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They state that the expense also goes to cost of attendance... so is this money on top of the scholarship or does the scholarship deduct from the total each athlete can receive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They state that the expense also goes to cost of attendance... so is this money on top of the scholarship or does the scholarship deduct from the total each athlete can receive?

This has been promoted as money to let the athletes "live like other students"....and would apparently be in addition to all the scholarship assistance,tutors, etc. etc. etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...