More than 300 major college football and men's basketball players are telling the NCAA and college presidents they want a cut of ever-increasing TV sports revenue to fatten scholarships and cover all the costs of getting a degree, with athletes picking up still more grant money when they graduate.
the gist of it
-Dividing a portion of new TV revenues evenly among FBS football players and Division I men's basketball players. This money would go into an educational lockbox (a trust fund) that we can receive if we abide by NCAA rules and graduate, or to pursue our undergraduate degree when our eligibility expires. This would increase our graduation rates and decrease violations.
-Raising our scholarships equal to the cost of attendance so our schools can fully support our education—an average increase of approximately $3200/year per full scholarship athlete.
-Allowing our schools the option to prioritize our education by providing multi-year scholarships.
-Preventing permanently injured players from losing their scholarships.
-Ensuring we are not stuck with sports-related medical expenses.
These are some of the many solutions that can finally allow the NCAA to realize its mission to educate and protect us with integrity. Any Title IX requirements related to the above reforms can and should also be funded with new TV revenues. We endorse the NCPA's call for comprehensive reform to occur in October.
I'm a fan of this... esp. the trust thing... i'm surprised they didnt add a clause pushing for a portion of all image-related sales - to also be held in trust.
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions
this would hurt FCS football.
FCS football doesn't draw anywhere near the amount of "TV money" that BCS games do, and any such revenues are used by the athletic programs (most of whom are struggling to maintain their budgets as it is).
And if you notice, such proposed funds are divided amongst FBS players, not FCS. (and I'm sure the BCS conferences aren't going to stand for equal distribution amongst the "big leagues" and the "second tier" conferences that don't generate that much TV revenue).
-Raising our scholarships equal to the cost of attendance so our schools can fully support our education—an average increase of approximately $3200/year per full scholarship athlete.
Where exactly would this money come from? And would it be for every sport? (it would almost have to be) If this is out of the pocket of the schools themselves it could crush mid-major schools like those of us at the FCS level.
-Allowing our schools the option to prioritize our education by providing multi-year scholarships.
-Allowing our schools the option to prioritize our education by providing multi-year scholarships.
What exactly does this mean?
It means programs with the funds can hoard talent and would keep talented players from transferring. It would basically allow the top notch programs to corner the market. For us FCS folks, it means a lot less (or none at all) FBS player drop downs.
-Allowing our schools the option to prioritize our education by providing multi-year scholarships.
What exactly does this mean?
When you sign on the dotted line, you receive a one-year 'grant-in-aid' which is essentially renewed each year you are on the team.
"But the damned and the guiltiest among you are the men who had the capacity to know, yet chose to blank out reality, the men who were willing to sell their intelligence into cynical servitude..."
- John Galt
Between this and the $2,000 grant-in-aid increase proposed by the NCAA, you will basically be able to lock up athletes to multi-year "contracts" and bid for their services out of high school...sound familiar?
People don't get this, but TV runs everything in college football right now. And college football pulls everyone else along for the ride. The FCS is being marginalized faster than you can count to 10. The FCS is only temporarily being lifted up by the fact that it is so easy to scream games across the internet for ESPN3. The FCS as a whole is going to be severely impacted in the coming decade.
"College Football is NOT A BUSINESS. It is revenue-producing, and all the money gets reinvested." Nick Saban
I am diagnosed as manic-depressive. You have been warned.
in fbs this is a solution to seperate the big 6 conferences from the rest. they arent thinking about them or fcs. i guess we can all schedule another money game to cover this new expense. what about the olympic sports? do they get the extra money too?
my thing is - i dont think they should get the TV money... I DO think they should get a cut of any licensing that uses THEIR image. If a player sells thousands of jersey's they should get a cut - held in trust - and only available if they graduate. Proper incentive - and proper reward. This would hold for their licensing on video games and other uses of their image.
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:my thing is - i dont think they should get the TV money... I DO think they should get a cut of any licensing that uses THEIR image. If a player sells thousands of jersey's they should get a cut - held in trust - and only available if they graduate. Proper incentive - and proper reward. This would hold for their licensing on video games and other uses of their image.
I disagree with that proposal. Any money gained by a program is eventually used to improve facilities, pay for tutoring staff, better meals, more gear, better equipment, chartered flights vs. bus, etc. If the players before them received "a cut", they would not be enjoying all of these perks that they are already enjoying. If their "image" was being used, then they are getting publicity that they would not have otherwise received. It's high time these players understand the cost and value of a college education.
would this 2k thing be enough to seperate the "amazing super magnificant" 6 away from the rest and FCS? what does this mean if it happens? do fcs pay it too or not or those that can do? how does this affect non bcs leagues?
