Paying Athletes and Power Conferences

[whiteandblue77]

Anybody know how the move to paying athletes would affect basketball? They don't make any distinctions at all here regarding sports other than football.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story ... ident-says

[Lavinwood]

Well the short answer is this: if payment is allowed then the ACC/Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12/SEC schools will have TONS more disposable income to spend on buying recruits. I hate to admit this, but Providence, SJ, DePaul, SHU, Butler, Xavier, Nova, G'Town, etc. will not be able to match anywhere near what they could pay kids. They have the massive football schools with 100,000 people packing stadiums. Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. are not just teams...they are brands. They sell merchandise nationally from California to New York. There is no way in hell we can compete with that.

The only thing I can think of is a very stringent cap if payment does become allowed. A hard cap would keep smaller schools with much less money in the running in theory, but we all know behind closed doors the huge football conference schools would be offering back-door deals to up the ante. It's simply not fair that college football has ruined college basketball. Imagine what the SEC would be saying if the Big East raided their schools overnight for basketball purposes and killed rivalries and split up teams that have been together for decades.

The day Cuse and Pitt packed their bags in the middle of the night and abandoned the Big East that treated them so well for so long, the super conference era began. Hate to be a pessimist, but we all know money talks. And they have all of it. That's the bottom line.

[stever20]

totally don't think it's as dire as Lavinwood makes it out to be for us.

I don't think schools are going to be allowed to pay kids 10,000 per recruit. Really don't. I think it'll be at the most like 1-2k per recruit.

I think in basketball what we're going to see-
The 10 FBS conferences will all have the cost of attendance. Big East and I'd guess A10. But that would be it- may see like 1 more conference but that's it.

Instead of conferences like the MVC or WCC having some good teams, I'd guess the MAC, SBC, and CUSA would get a bit stronger.

[aughnanure]

Well the short answer is this: if payment is allowed then the ACC/Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12/SEC schools will have TONS more disposable income to spend on buying recruits. I hate to admit this, but Providence, SJ, DePaul, SHU, Butler, Xavier, Nova, G'Town, etc. will not be able to match anywhere near what they could pay kids. They have the massive football schools with 100,000 people packing stadiums. Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. are not just teams...they are brands. They sell merchandise nationally from California to New York. There is no way in hell we can compete with that.

The only thing I can think of is a very stringent cap if payment does become allowed. A hard cap would keep smaller schools with much less money in the running in theory, but we all know behind closed doors the huge football conference schools would be offering back-door deals to up the ante. It's simply not fair that college football has ruined college basketball. Imagine what the SEC would be saying if the Big East raided their schools overnight for basketball purposes and killed rivalries and split up teams that have been together for decades.

The day Cuse and Pitt packed their bags in the middle of the night and abandoned the Big East that treated them so well for so long, the super conference era began. Hate to be a pessimist, but we all know money talks. And they have all of it. That's the bottom line.

Jeez Debby Downer. Relax. No schools actually want to pay players. They'll want to do things like 'full cost of tuition" (whatever that means) and make scholarships 4-year agreements that allow the student-Athlete to complete their degree anytime in the future. Hell, we already are kind of paying players (I know most schools now give their SAs something like $500 a month for "food" and what not). If they do start payment, it will be on a stipend, limited, basis. Schools like Oregon State, Purdue, Wake Forest, and hell most all college basketball powers (Cuse, UConn, Arizona, etc) don't want to open the floodgates for the powerhouses like Texas, OU, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Alabama, Ohio State to out bid everyone.

Seriously, relax.

[whiteandblue77]

Well the short answer is this: if payment is allowed then the ACC/Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12/SEC schools will have TONS more disposable income to spend on buying recruits. I hate to admit this, but Providence, SJ, DePaul, SHU, Butler, Xavier, Nova, G'Town, etc. will not be able to match anywhere near what they could pay kids. They have the massive football schools with 100,000 people packing stadiums. Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. are not just teams...they are brands. They sell merchandise nationally from California to New York. There is no way in hell we can compete with that.

The only thing I can think of is a very stringent cap if payment does become allowed. A hard cap would keep smaller schools with much less money in the running in theory, but we all know behind closed doors the huge football conference schools would be offering back-door deals to up the ante. It's simply not fair that college football has ruined college basketball. Imagine what the SEC would be saying if the Big East raided their schools overnight for basketball purposes and killed rivalries and split up teams that have been together for decades.

The day Cuse and Pitt packed their bags in the middle of the night and abandoned the Big East that treated them so well for so long, the super conference era began. Hate to be a pessimist, but we all know money talks. And they have all of it. That's the bottom line.

Jeez Debby Downer. Relax. No schools actually want to pay players. They'll want to do things like 'full cost of tuition" (whatever that means) and make scholarships 4-year agreements that allow the student-Athlete to complete their degree anytime in the future. Hell, we already are kind of paying players (I know most schools now give their SAs something like $500 a month for "food" and what not). If they do start payment, it will be on a stipend, limited, basis. Schools like Oregon State, Purdue, Wake Forest, and hell most all college basketball powers (Cuse, UConn, Arizona, etc) don't want to open the floodgates for the powerhouses like Texas, OU, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Alabama, Ohio State to out bid everyone.

Seriously, relax.

Two very intelligent antipodes! Thanks.

[marquette]

Well the short answer is this: if payment is allowed then the ACC/Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12/SEC schools will have TONS more disposable income to spend on buying recruits. I hate to admit this, but Providence, SJ, DePaul, SHU, Butler, Xavier, Nova, G'Town, etc. will not be able to match anywhere near what they could pay kids. They have the massive football schools with 100,000 people packing stadiums. Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. are not just teams...they are brands. They sell merchandise nationally from California to New York. There is no way in hell we can compete with that.

The only thing I can think of is a very stringent cap if payment does become allowed. A hard cap would keep s smaller schools with much less money in the running in theory, but we all know behind closed doors the huge football conference schools would be offering back-door deals to up the ante. It's simply not fair that college football has ruined college basketball. Imagine what the SEC would be saying if the Big East raided their schools overnight for basketball purposes and killed rivalries and split up teams that have been together for decades.

The day Cuse and Pitt packed their bags in the middle of the night and abandoned the Big East that treated them so well for so long, the super conference era began. Hate to be a pessimist, but we all know money talks. And they have all of it. That's the bottom line.

Unrestricted payments to players would ruin all but maybe 10 schools. Off the top of my head Maryland needs the B1G money just to keep from going bankrupt. If they had to start competing for player salaries they would go under as an institution (not an athletics program) in a matter of a few years. Rutgers, West Virginia, Boston College, Wake Forrest, and untold others are in the same boat. You can throw in schools like Northwestern who won't pay players out of principle. Truth is, the athletic budgets are already so bloated that many in the B1G and other major conferences are starting to have trouble keeping up. We are talking about nominal amounts like a $10,000/year stipend. That is something Big East schools could generally bear, especially if it is only for revenue sports.

[aughnanure]

Well the short answer is this: if payment is allowed then the ACC/Big Ten/Big 12/Pac 12/SEC schools will have TONS more disposable income to spend on buying recruits. I hate to admit this, but Providence, SJ, DePaul, SHU, Butler, Xavier, Nova, G'Town, etc. will not be able to match anywhere near what they could pay kids. They have the massive football schools with 100,000 people packing stadiums. Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. are not just teams...they are brands. They sell merchandise nationally from California to New York. There is no way in hell we can compete with that.

The only thing I can think of is a very stringent cap if payment does become allowed. A hard cap would keep s smaller schools with much less money in the running in theory, but we all know behind closed doors the huge football conference schools would be offering back-door deals to up the ante. It's simply not fair that college football has ruined college basketball. Imagine what the SEC would be saying if the Big East raided their schools overnight for basketball purposes and killed rivalries and split up teams that have been together for decades.

The day Cuse and Pitt packed their bags in the middle of the night and abandoned the Big East that treated them so well for so long, the super conference era began. Hate to be a pessimist, but we all know money talks. And they have all of it. That's the bottom line.

Unrestricted payments to players would ruin all but maybe 10 schools. Off the top of my head Maryland needs the B1G money just to keep from going bankrupt. If they had to start competing for player salaries they would go under as an institution (not an athletics program) in a matter of a few years. Rutgers, West Virginia, Boston College, Wake Forrest, and untold others are in the same boat. You can throw in schools like Northwestern who won't pay players out of principle. Truth is, the athletic budgets are already so bloated that many in the B1G and other major conferences are starting to have trouble keeping up. We are talking about nominal amounts like a $10,000/year stipend. That is something Big East schools could generally bear, especially if it is only for revenue sports.

And I think 10,000 would be on the very very high end of possibilities. Likely something more along the lines of $2,500 a semester.

[DudeAnon]

Then players will get paid what they are worth. Let them major in sports and let the stars make some extra cash on the side (and externally via sponsors etc.) I think that would take care of it.