Player Compensation

[Mileslong 4,728]

Yes, I have proof of this and their names. I'm just keeping it to myself because I like to see Texas getting its dick kicked in recruiting. Seriously? The world is not black and white. There is a large swath of positions between "making this up" and "proof of payment". 

I realize the world is gray but I always hear how Bama wins because they are paying players etc yet there isn’t any proof of large scale payoffs anymore. Only flippant “they bought their championship” etc.

I’m not taking about some booster giving some recruit tickets or meals but rather institutionalized payoffs. The last time I heard of anything close was Reggie bush 15 years ago. I just don’t it happens on that scale anymore

[Jkwellborn 6,713]

It’s not like there wasn’t a big write up in a sports magazine about being a bag man in the $ec a few years ago.

[Neonmoon 38,129]

1 hour ago, Mileslong said:

I realize the world is gray but I always hear how Bama wins because they are paying players etc yet there isn’t any proof of large scale payoffs anymore. Only flippant “they bought their championship” etc.

I’m not taking about some booster giving some recruit tickets or meals but rather institutionalized payoffs. The last time I heard of anything close was Reggie bush 15 years ago. I just don’t it happens on that scale anymore

First off, Exhibit A

1 hour ago, Jkwellborn said:

It’s not like there wasn’t a big write up in a sports magazine about being a bag man in the $ec a few years ago.

Secondly, 

Bama wins because Saban is a good college football coach and they pay for certain players. Obviously once they started winning a TON of games and championships, they don't have to pay for as many players, many guys commit to them because they want to get well coached, win championships, and play in the NFL. No one is debating that. But there are some guys they absolutely still pay to sign. Jaylen Waddle had a known street agent touting him around. Cam Newton was offered $150,000 to sign 10 years ago. You think that kind of booster money goes away? 

Stop trying to apply the same scenario for every player. It doesn't work like that. Every situation is different. Obviously there are tons of highly recruited players who don't have their hand out, and would take offense to the mere thought of it. That doesn't mean there isn't a 5 star RB from Florida that will sign for six figures. These players will absolutely change the game, add to win totals, and thus increase money to the School/Coach/Athletic Department and increase enrollment. Yes, the highly touted TE from Texas that spurns in state schools to go to Alabama just wants to play for a good team and win a championship. The 5 star OT in Texas this year that most think goes the same route also just wants to be well coached. That doesn't mean there aren't others that go the other route. 

If a player commits to a school six states away without even visiting a school. That's a red flag. If a recruit lists his top schools and they include 5 of the following: Georgia, Alabama, LSU, Oregon, Ohio State, A&M, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Tennessee. That's a red flag. 

Now...fast forward to the NFL draft. 

Random idiot on TV or internet: How come Texas lets all these good players leave Texas? Why can't Texas put players in the NFL? 

That negatively affects recruiting. Now again, many players left because Texas sucked, but some because they wanted to be compensated for their efforts, but if you add all those together, it's a continual drain on current recruiting and current results. 

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Neonmoon

[Wulaw Horn 19,138]

On 4/24/2020 at 12:09 PM, David Dennison said:

Market value?

Vast majority of them? Yes.

Collectively?  Maybe- but probably not

A few of them?  Criminally underpaid. 

Go look at how much minor league baseball, basketball and hockey pay their guys. It’s maybe less than minimum wage. The value and cash that rolls into the NCAA is not brought about because the football skills for these 18-23 year olds are the best minor league football talent in the world- it’s brought about by the value of the brand of the school. 

If that weren’t the case than every league other than the NFL would not have spectacularly failed and minor league players would get paid. 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Wulaw Horn

[Wulaw Horn 19,138]

Also this is a stunningly easy way to pay players. I hope we get out in front of it. 

Ok Mr 5 star- see that guy over there?  He’s collecting exclusive autographs for the best 17 year old players he’s ever seen. He’s going to pay you $200,000 for your autograph (right after you sign with Texas of course). 

That fine autograph collector can’t be associated with the school officially but that shouldn’t be hard. 

[Beau Vine 54,310]

18 hours ago, TexMex Horn said:

I agree, except don't call it College Football. Call it whatever you want, but it's not college athletics. I know I'm the outlier on this site, but I want the opposite to happen. I want money out of college sports. Athletes that want to go pro w/o going to college, should just go straight to the pros. I prefer the model of the lower divisions. Strict adherence to amateur athletics. Buzzkill, I know

Then why aren't you posting on the Sul Ross fan site?

[Beau Vine 54,310]

19 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Vast majority of them? Yes.

Collectively?  Maybe- but probably not

A few of them?  Criminally underpaid. 

Go look at how much minor league baseball, basketball and hockey pay their guys. It’s maybe less than minimum wage. The value and cash that rolls into the NCAA is not brought about because the football skills for these 18-23 year olds are the best minor league football talent in the world- it’s brought about by the value of the brand of the school. 

If that weren’t the case than every league other than the NFL would not have spectacularly failed and minor league players would get paid. 

This is 10 years old... Minor league hockey players regularly make hundreds of thousands per season.

[Beau Vine 54,310]

17 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

As has been stated extremely clearly in this thread, 98% of the "value" is the name on the front of the jersey, not the back.

If this is true, then this should go extremely smoothly and have virtually no effect on the NCAA.

Yet the NCAA has spent millions of dollars fighting this, and are being dragged kicking and screaming into this resolution by the states.  

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

Counterpoint: Texas leading in merchandise sales during the last ten years of futility. Literally had the worst coach in school history. 
 

Texas actually had a real student athlete program at this time, evidence being lack of NFL draft picks. This wasn’t a team full of professionals, no first rounders and a handful of day 2-3 guys. 
 

The names changed, the losses came, and the merchandise kept flying off the shelves. 

Edited May 1, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[ImissWallyPryor 9,046]

If a fan with a $100 budget buys their kid a Sam Ellinger jersey for $75 instead of a $25 t-shirt, then buys himself a $25 Texas t-shirt instead of that $75 Texas polo he so wanted, how much should Sam earn off that transaction?

Edited May 1, 2020 by ImissWallyPryor

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

I think he need about 10% of that Texas Golf bag you bought. 

[TexMex Horn 68]

2 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

Then why aren't you posting on the Sul Ross fan site?

Because I've only driven by Sul Ross, but I spent some great years at UT. I also don't post on NFL sites, because I don't have any relationship with those entities. I would believe that most college sports fans have a personal relationship with the host program. IMO, the paying of players will further distance them from that relationship. I'm not saying they don't deserve a piece of the pie. Just that this isn't the same pie that used to be. JS

[Iceman 2,722]

2 hours ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

If a fan with a $100 budget buys their kid a Sam Ellinger jersey for $75 instead of a $25 t-shirt, then buys himself a $25 Texas t-shirt instead of that $75 Texas polo he so wanted, how much should Sam earn off that transaction?

about tree-fiddy

[Wulaw Horn 19,138]

3 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

This is 10 years old... Minor league hockey players regularly make hundreds of thousands per season.

I wonder how much is salary vs signing bonus on that table?  

The point still stands that there isn’t a lot of money in wages for minor leagues. 

[Grade of D as in David 13,253]

28 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I wonder how much is salary vs signing bonus on that table?  

The point still stands that there isn’t a lot of money in wages for minor leagues. 

There also aren't multi billion television rights contracts for minor league sports. If they want to claim amateurism then give that money to the academic side since the athletic programs would not exist without the colleges and universities. Similar to the argument that individual athletes wouldn't be able to market themselves without the program.  Get rid of the charter flights, and nice hotels since most minor league teams travel by bus and live in shitty motels. Stop paying coaches more than their professional counterparts. College sports wants all of the trappings of a professional league without paying for the labor. South Park hit it on the head.

 

Edited to add

One of my best friend's new brother in law spent the last couple of years pitching in the minor leagues. He says it's night and day compared to the lodging etc that he received while at aggy

Edited May 1, 2020 by Grade of D as in David
Addition

[Neonmoon 38,129]

Most people against paying players are okay with exchanging tuition, room and board in exchange for athletics performance. So they already agree on paying the player, now we are just haggling over price. Now if you want to advocate a pure game where fully qualified, self paying students compete for the schools, be my guest. 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Neonmoon

[Iceman 2,722]

4 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Counterpoint: Texas leading in merchandise sales during the last ten years of futility. Literally had the worst coach in school history. 
 

Texas actually had a real student athlete program at this time, evidence being lack of NFL draft picks. This wasn’t a team full of professionals, no first rounders and a handful of day 2-3 guys. 
 

The names changed, the losses came, and the merchandise kept flying off the shelves. 

so where's the risk in letting the players market themselves?

Texas stuff sells itself, right?   

[Iceman 2,722]

27 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Most people against paying players are okay with exchanging tuition, room and board in exchange for athletics performance. So they already agree on paying the player, now we are just haggling over price. Now if you want to advocate a pure game where fully qualified, self paying students compete for the schools, be my guest. 

Hell, even when Navy plays Army, the Seniors' stipend is greater than that of the lower classmen.

The notion of amateurism in college sports is a fantasy, as is that of 'fairness' and 'accountability.'

 

Quit kicking the players in the balls and let them make a nickel on their own if they can do so.( not preaching at you)

Edited May 1, 2020 by Iceman

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

4 minutes ago, Iceman said:

so where's the risk in letting the players market themselves?

Texas stuff sells itself, right?   

None, I'm all for it. 

[ImissWallyPryor 9,046]

2 hours ago, Iceman said:

about tree-fiddy

[2300 Nueces 163]

This looks like an opportunity for Texas and Texas Boosters to return the school to pre scholarship limit dominance.  First, is there a limit to what an athlete may be paid?  Whatever that limit, Texas needs to arrange for every scholarship athlete to make that amount.  The benefit of this is obvious.  We may not always get the best individual player but our quality will be unmatched.  The highest level players will soon want to play for Texas for the opportunity.  We can control the talent market with our huge corporate partnerships.  I think this is a recipe to pre scholarship limit dominance.  Every year we need to be pushing to raise the amount players may earn because lesser schools will never be able to match.

Edited May 1, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[Iceman 2,722]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

you're never gonna be 3-4 deep with capable starters.

Transfer portal out front shoulda told ya.

[HRSchenker 2,271]

This could be a huge deal for smaller, lower tier programs. Don't kid yourself. There is a ton of money at universities with a football program. If you're a top tier caliber player who has a focus on money, would you go to a school like Texas where you have to compete with players like Ehlinger or Dicker? Or would you be better off going to a lower tier program like Texas A&M or Arkansas State where you would be the big shot of the program instantly? Might get a slightly smaller pay out but you would get a bigger piece of the pie.

[Grade of D as in David 13,253]

1 hour ago, 2300 Nueces said:

This looks like an opportunity for Texas and Texas Boosters to return the school to pre scholarship limit dominance.  First, is there a limit to what an athlete may be paid?  Whatever that limit, Texas needs to arrange for every scholarship athlete to make that amount.  The benefit of this is obvious.  We may not always get the best individual player but our quality will be unmatched.  The highest level players will soon want to play for Texas for the opportunity.  We can control the talent market with our huge corporate partnerships.  I think this is a recipe to pre scholarship limit dominance.  Every year we need to be pushing to raise the amount players may earn because lesser schools will never be able to match.

Lol ok.

That ship has sailed. Recruits want to get into the NFL where the real money is or at least win something along the way. We have shown that we cannot do either as well as other teams.

 

[2300 Nueces 163]

100k per player per year to start.  That's 4.8 million out of a budget of 150 million.  Think this is unrealistic?  It better be realistic because our competition will be doing it.  That 150 million in revenue can shrink quickly and will if we continue our current path.  Take a stroll on some of the streets where many of these kids come from and 100k and a school with the best players is the future.   This will be Texas if CDC is worth a shit.  If not,  and he lets this get ahead of him, he'll be fired in a few years.

 

Not many schools would be able to match 100k per player per year.  Maybe we set up a few players with additional benefits but I think this is realistic.   This is within our reach.  Not many people give a fuck about expanded end zones and such but we do want championships.

Edited May 1, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[Michael Knight 12,989]

A generic Texas jersey would sell X amount a generic Vince Young jersey would sell Y amount, a Texas branded Vince jersey would sell Z amount.  X>Y and Z > X+Y. Solve for Y and factor in Z.

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

Does X include all #10 Texas Jerseys sold before VY?

[Neonmoon 38,129]

46 minutes ago, 2300 Nueces said:

100k per player per year to start.  That's 4.8 million out of a budget of 150 million.  Think this is unrealistic?  It better be realistic because our competition will be doing it.  That 150 million in revenue can shrink quickly and will if we continue our current path.  Take a stroll on some of the streets where many of these kids come from and 100k and a school with the best players is the future.   This will be Texas if CDC is worth a shit.  If not,  and he lets this get ahead of him, he'll be fired in a few years.

 

Not many schools would be able to match 100k per player per year.  Maybe we set up a few players with additional benefits but I think this is realistic.   This is within our reach.  Not many people give a fuck about expanded end zones and such but we do want championships.

85 players on roster = 8.5 million 

Your point remains. I wholeheartedly agree. 

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

Why not?  I’d make it 100k for every year they finish academically. They can access the cash after each season if they want to or leave it in a university account until they are ready to use it. 

That is in addition to them making money any way they can from their likeness and name. I’m sure Sam could make a few bucks on twitch or some shit if he wanted to. 

[ouflak 60]

21 hours ago, Grade of D as in David said:

If they want to claim amateurism then give that money to the academic side since the athletic programs would not exist without the colleges and universities.

 

I don't believe this is a logical statement. The vast majority of educational systems in the world have their sports completely intramural or separate from the universities. I mean I know we're talking sci-fi alternate universe stuff here, but if the American educational system had left sports to basically separate 'leagues', never moving anything past intramural setups, we might be living in a world where this whole argument about who gets paid what would be moot and we would all be big fans of local minor-league teams instead of university teams.

Edited May 2, 2020 by ouflak

[Laga4 1,270]

I'm not against players being paid,  but the thing that bothers me is that it's not going to be well thought out and there will be massive loopholes. 

The payment for images etc. is going to be a bucket of worms.  Kids will want to spend more time promoting their stuff than in the weight room. 

Even if there is a cap on cash payments, that  won't stop some teams from going over that amount.

It looks like a draft without any order to who drafts first. 

edit:  Plus I guess the NCAA is going to be in charge. Oh boy!!!

Edited May 2, 2020 by Laga4

[BurntOrange&White 39,934]

My gripe is the NCAA barely regulates the rules they currently have so this is going to be a complete cluster fuck.

[Beau Vine 54,310]

For the life of me, I don't understand why some of you continually set up scenarios that involve the school paying the players and argue about it.

[Laga4 1,270]

14 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

For the life of me, I don't understand why some of you continually set up scenarios that involve the school paying the players and argue about it.

I thought that's what message boards do.  

[tx 3 putt 77,225]

this is the beginning of the end 

[n64ra 1,086]

https://www.si.com/college/2020/05/05/ncaa-football-video-game-return-group-licensing

"... introducing restrictions on how players can profit from their name, image and likeness (NIL). Among the most notable, athletes cannot partner with schools for NIL ventures, use school or conference logos in such endeavors and are barred from entering group licensing deals. "

WTF? Cannot partner with schools? Time for the NCAA to die.

[Beau Vine 54,310]

23 hours ago, n64ra said:

https://www.si.com/college/2020/05/05/ncaa-football-video-game-return-group-licensing

"... introducing restrictions on how players can profit from their name, image and likeness (NIL). Among the most notable, athletes cannot partner with schools for NIL ventures, use school or conference logos in such endeavors and are barred from entering group licensing deals. "

WTF? Cannot partner with schools? Time for the NCAA to die.

If the schools are involved, Title IX issues come into play.

[LTtxfan 49,315]

 

[LTtxfan 49,315]

 

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

On 5/5/2020 at 3:50 PM, n64ra said:

https://www.si.com/college/2020/05/05/ncaa-football-video-game-return-group-licensing

"... introducing restrictions on how players can profit from their name, image and likeness (NIL). Among the most notable, athletes cannot partner with schools for NIL ventures, use school or conference logos in such endeavors and are barred from entering group licensing deals. "

WTF? Cannot partner with schools? Time for the NCAA to die.

Yes. Using the school name/logo/likeness For individual endorsements hasn’t been on the table since this debate started. As it shouldn’t be. 
 

as was discussed on previous pages, many athletes will find out their name/likeness is worthless without the school affiliation. The current Texas roster doesn’t have 10 marque players who will command personal endorsements. It’s closer to 2. This covers the 1% of college football players who are actually “underpaid”. 

Edited May 20, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[2300 Nueces 163]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Yes. Using the school name/logo/likeness For individual endorsements hasn’t been on the table since this debate started. As it shouldn’t be. 
 

as was discussed on previous pages, many athletes will find out their name/likeness is worthless without the school affiliation. The current Texas roster doesn’t have 10 marque players who will command personal endorsements. It’s closer to 2. This covers the 1% of college football players who are actually “underpaid”. 

Ok, why not arrange with boosters the max payment for every player?  If Texas is winning, is the advertisement value not greater?  I am sure that there are some Texas Alumni/boosters that want to see us to regain per-scholarship limit dominance.

Edited May 20, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

2 hours ago, 2300 Nueces said:

Ok, why not arrange with boosters the max payment for every player?  If Texas is winning, is the advertisement value not greater?  I am sure that there are some Texas Alumni/boosters that want to see us to regain per-scholarship limit dominance.

Any private individual should be able to pay a player whatever sum they want for whatever job/service they want. Report to IRS. Who cares otherwise. Leave the school out of it and let them earn their money. YouTube. Twitch. Car dealerships. Who cares. Report and tax, more power to them. The school, who already provides a shit load of goods and services, shouldn’t be responsible otherwise. Let them do their thing. 
 

*registered boosters are excluded from employment. 
 

What is this Max payment?  They are free to maximize their income based on their likeness. They just can’t piggyback off of the school. 

Edited May 20, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[2300 Nueces 163]

Exactly.  If this happens, we win.  I would only add that the school (Exes Foundation) recruit businesses to take care of the players.  A warm hand off with some "guidelines".  Otherwise, stay out of it.

Edited May 20, 2020 by 2300 Nueces

[CooterBrown 18,015]

9 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Any private individual should be able to pay a player whatever sum they want for whatever job/service they want. Report to IRS. Who cares otherwise. Leave the school out of it and let them earn their money.

Need a BSD to step up and endow a fund that pays $100K/year to each scholarship player and be done. Shit, get  a group together to do a fund raising effort to build the fund. 

Edited May 20, 2020 by CooterBrown

[Beau Vine 54,310]

14 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

as was discussed on previous pages, many athletes will find out their name/likeness is worthless without the school affiliation. The current Texas roster doesn’t have 10 marque players who will command personal endorsements. It’s closer to 2. This covers the 1% of college football players who are actually “underpaid”. 

Yeah, that was "discussed," but it doesn't mean it is correct.  You fail to consider the thousands of NCAA softball/baseball/hockey players who will now be able to get paid for running camps or providing private coaching back in their hometowns in the summer.  NIL doesn't begin and end with "personal endorsements."  

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

[Blotto 23,560]

lulz at the idea that Texas and its boosters are the only school capable of ponying up $8.5 million a year to pay each football player $100K. Plenty of schools and their boosters are capable of paying multiples of that. Even though Texas is theoretically capable of paying more than most schools, the reality is that philosophically we will not lead the charge down that path. 

[Catdaddyhorn 3,447]

57 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Yeah, that was "discussed," but it doesn't mean it is correct.  You fail to consider the thousands of NCAA softball/baseball/hockey players who will now be able to get paid for running camps or providing private coaching back in their hometowns in the summer.  NIL doesn't begin and end with "personal endorsements."  

Not to mention other creative things where players can now showcase a talent and not worry about flouting dumbass NCAA rules.  Think of the UCF kicker who had to quit football in order to keep doing his YouTube stuff. This spurious attempt at justifying the continued prohibition of names and likeness because they wont be able to make a million bucks or some other specified amount of money is fucking asinine. Who cares whether they can make a single red cent. Their name is their name and they should have rights to it, full stop. 

[Alien Octopus 555]

On 5/1/2020 at 8:34 AM, ImissWallyPryor said:

If a fan with a $100 budget buys their kid a Sam Ellinger jersey for $75 instead of a $25 t-shirt, then buys himself a $25 Texas t-shirt instead of that $75 Texas polo he so wanted, how much should Sam earn off that transaction?

Jack shit. He gets to play QB at UT.

[CooterBrown 18,015]

4 hours ago, Blotto said:

lulz at the idea that Texas and its boosters are the only school capable of ponying up $8.5 million a year to pay each football player $100K. Plenty of schools and their boosters are capable of paying multiples of that. Even though Texas is theoretically capable of paying more than most schools, the reality is that philosophically we will not lead the charge down that path. 

We need to get to it then.  Payroll is gonna win future championships. To think otherwise is naive.