Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351

    WRT stipends, at $2000/yr, you're only talking $1 mi. to pay every athlete on campus.

    And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.

  2. #2
    Will Stewart's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 18, 1999
    Location
    Radford, VA
    Posts
    42,910
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    WRT stipends, at $2000/yr, you're only talking $1 mi. to pay every athlete on campus. And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.
    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you guys do, but there's a school of thought that the big schools are using the $2,000 stipend as a tool/impetus for breaking away from the smaller schools .... creating a new division within the NCAA where athletes are paid that stipend, or just breaking away entirely.
    Always use "Reply With Quote", so everyone knows to whom you're responding.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    3,599
    I can live with a $2k stipend, it is a small percentage addition to cost of the scholarship and it makes sense. Let's just not tie the stipend to the revenues the AD is generating. There shouldn't be any relationship. I'm tired of the flawed "exploitation" argument as a way to justify any stipend.

  4. #4
    hokiebob01's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 01, 2001
    Location
    Mint Hill, NC
    Posts
    14,525
    You really should follow the news more closely. The larger schools (there is no BCS), including Virginia Tech and Jim Weaver, were very willing to vote for a proposal allowing schools that wished to to do that. It never came to a vote because the smaller schools objected to it and they are in a majority. It is not dead. It is still being considered they just don't want to bring it to a vote until they have the votes to pass it.

    Nice cheap shot at Jim Weaver though. I guess you just want to criticize him for everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.
    I don't always talk to UVa Grads but when I do I always order the Large Fries.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    October 14, 2003
    Posts
    10,282
    I have a feeling that many, especially the star football players and mens basketball players who could be making a ton of money in the pros, will be content for long with $2,000. Will likely be a slippery slope thing. Not sure how I feel about it.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    December 22, 2002
    Posts
    4,351
    Quote Originally Posted by hokiebob01 View Post
    You really should follow the news more closely. The larger schools (there is no BCS), including Virginia Tech and Jim Weaver, were very willing to vote for a proposal allowing schools that wished to to do that. It never came to a vote because the smaller schools objected to it and they are in a majority. It is not dead. It is still being considered they just don't want to bring it to a vote until they have the votes to pass it.

    Nice cheap shot at Jim Weaver though. I guess you just want to criticize him for everything.
    I realize all of that. And the term "BCS school" is still utilized because the BCS still exists. In fact, we're hoping to play in a BCS bowl this season. And I have nothing personal against Weaver. I sincerely feel for him WRT his health. However, the guy is known to be quite cheap when it comes to AD expenses. He's ran off women of the best coaches we've ever had in a couple of sports and he nearly ran off Beamer for goodness sake. He then made up for these by making lazy and incredibly cheap hires. And don't give me this nonsense about our great schedules. The reasons we are playing Bama this month is because of Beamer's success and our incredible fan base. Neither of those have much to do w/ the AD. In fact, when it comes to our traveling fans, the Dept has done an generally horrible job of marketing.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    October 29, 2001
    Posts
    7,455
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.
    While I generally don't support paying this stipend, this post shows why the "we can't afford it...we'll go broke" argument doesn't work...for the BCS schools. Yes, very few athletic departments run in the black, but for the most part that's because they don't have good financial management....not because the money isn't there, it's just prioritized elsewhere ($$ wars on facilities and coaching salaries).

  8. #8
    BUGGZY's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 15, 2002
    Location
    Annandale, VA
    Posts
    13,709
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.
    why don't they just reclassify Football as a paid internship like other jobs on campus, and determine a fair pay rate, and just pay them as university employees? the NCAA could regulate/cap this to ensure schools don't try one upping each other (and i know most schools would just pay the cap).

    This would teach kids how to manage money, pay/file tax returns, save/invest, etc. i feel like a stipend would be paid out in a lump sum and be spent on stupid stuff before the first day of school comes around more often than not.

    i'm sure i'm oversimplifying, but aren't athletes essentially marketing representatives for the university? why not pay them as such (while taking into consideration the fact they already have a scholarship and other benefits)?
    "This no more resembles that than something unlike something else resembles that." - Loosely quoting PHNC

  9. #9
    MEHOKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Location
    In a van.
    Posts
    62,350
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckd4vt View Post
    And $2000 is the number being tossed around. That is peanuts to every BCS AD not named Jim Weaver. We're talking billions nowadays w/ these TV contracts and playoffs. Anyhow, folks need to keep that in mind when we're questioning the desire and ability of athletic department s to pay them.
    Access to the coaching, training rooms, nutrition, and facilities is FAR beyond the value of a scholarship, but that is rarely mentioned in this discussion.

  10. #10
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    why don't they just reclassify Football as a paid internship like other jobs on campus, and determine a fair pay rate, and just pay them as university employees? the NCAA could regulate/cap this to ensure schools don't try one upping each other (and i know most schools would just pay the cap).

    This would teach kids how to manage money, pay/file tax returns, save/invest, etc. i feel like a stipend would be paid out in a lump sum and be spent on stupid stuff before the first day of school comes around more often than not.

    i'm sure i'm oversimplifying, but aren't athletes essentially marketing representatives for the university? why not pay them as such (while taking into consideration the fact they already have a scholarship and other benefits)?
    I guess there's 2 sides to everything. Most students pay for their tuition. Some students don't even get paid for their internships. I had 2 internships that barely paid above minimum wage and I didn't make enough money to pay for my apartment, food, and travel. I lost money but gained valuable work experience. Some students get paid well while other don't get paid at all. College athletes get paid through their tuition, tutoring services, medical, and stipend.

    I agree that college athletes are marketing representatives for their schools but it works the other way too. Student athletes choose to attend certain universities so they can receive the exposure and coaching they need to get to the next level (pros). College recruiters mention this to every big time athlete. "Come to Alabama and win national championships, plus your chances to make the NFL will be better." "Play for Kentucky and receive national exposure that will get you quickly into the NBA."

    I don't have a problem with a $2,000 stipend but I feel it could lead to more problems and corruption. The NCAA is the problem and has been for a long time. The NCAA should be completely overhauled before we start talking about paying college athletes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •