- Thread starter
- #1
Bengals1Fan
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 2,121
- Reaction score
- 16
I was going to write this as a reply to the other thread, but I got too into it and too serious to just post it there. Skim or read through and lemme know what you think. Personally, starting college this year, I think that College Athletes should be paid. Heres why: An average college student can pick up a job along with school work if they want to cut down the price of tuition etc. Because some of the big colleges in america make millions off the players and the games, I think the student athletes should get a percent of the profits from the games they play in. Here's what I would suggest:
Players get a 10% cut of each game. The players share is then determined by their playing time in said game. For example, we'll take football. Notre Dame made $43.2 Million dollars in profit during the 2011-2012 season. That'd be 3.6 Million per game in their 12 game season not including their bye week. Divide 10% from that and the total's 360,000 going to the players. Seems like a lot right? Now take their 108 man roster for 2011. That's $3,333 and some change per player per game. That would mean the average player on the Notre Dame football team would be making $39,996 for each football season that they remained eligible for the entire year. The average cost of attendance at Notre Dame including room, board, transportation, books, supplies, and personal expenses is around $60,000 a year. Which would cut the price of admission down for the college athlete down to around 20,000 dollars. Therefore the scholarships and federal aid will also help.
Now for the part where play amount sets into the funds. Let's take another 2% from the Notre Dame profit from football games. That's 64,000 extra for playing total. Divide it by 22 Starters if they played the entire game and we'll add a punter and kicker. That would only be an extra 2,666 dollars for starting IF they only played 24 players a game. (p.s They don't. The Number would be much smaller) Even if only 24 played, that'd be 31,992 extra a season, barring injury or academic ineligibility, sickness or anything like that.
Direct Example:
Johnny Manziel 2013 Season: 1 Game in, Manziel played roughly 1 quarter. Therefore, you would take the 2% that the playing players would get and cut it in half for the second half then half again to .5% for the 3rd quarter, then divide that .5% by the 22 or so players that saw the field during the third quarter. That small percent number is Manziel's cut from that game.
Add the 31,992 per year for playing every game all game for a season to the 39,996 they make for being on the team and attending all the off-season lifts, practices, etc. Add those together and the starting Notre Dame Player is making 71,988 dollars a year. So minus the 61,000 dollar tuition, the player is making 10,988 dollars a season. So therefore, If a player starts his junior and senior year, he's making $21,976 dollars for playing college football.
In today's economy, 22,000 dollars will barely buy you a new car. With this system, there's still reason to work towards the NFL, but still a solid "job" for the average athlete who won't make the NFL. You can directly apply this to any other sport as well, simply taking the profit, using the percents and time played in each game. Will the amount be smaller for different sports and schools? Yeah, but if a team like Buffalo University plays a team like Ohio State and get's romped. Their players will get payed more for making a difference in that game then they will in a smaller less televised game. But you also have to remember their tuition at Buffalo would be significantly less than the Notre Dame tuition.
The college is happy because it's still taking 90% of the profit from each game. The player is happy because while his time is being consumed by football, he won't have the crippling debt that college puts upon it's students now-a-days, if he's not making money, and he will have a drive to do well in school (I.E. Keep his grades up to stay on the team.)
Thoughts? Problems?
Players get a 10% cut of each game. The players share is then determined by their playing time in said game. For example, we'll take football. Notre Dame made $43.2 Million dollars in profit during the 2011-2012 season. That'd be 3.6 Million per game in their 12 game season not including their bye week. Divide 10% from that and the total's 360,000 going to the players. Seems like a lot right? Now take their 108 man roster for 2011. That's $3,333 and some change per player per game. That would mean the average player on the Notre Dame football team would be making $39,996 for each football season that they remained eligible for the entire year. The average cost of attendance at Notre Dame including room, board, transportation, books, supplies, and personal expenses is around $60,000 a year. Which would cut the price of admission down for the college athlete down to around 20,000 dollars. Therefore the scholarships and federal aid will also help.
Now for the part where play amount sets into the funds. Let's take another 2% from the Notre Dame profit from football games. That's 64,000 extra for playing total. Divide it by 22 Starters if they played the entire game and we'll add a punter and kicker. That would only be an extra 2,666 dollars for starting IF they only played 24 players a game. (p.s They don't. The Number would be much smaller) Even if only 24 played, that'd be 31,992 extra a season, barring injury or academic ineligibility, sickness or anything like that.
Direct Example:
Johnny Manziel 2013 Season: 1 Game in, Manziel played roughly 1 quarter. Therefore, you would take the 2% that the playing players would get and cut it in half for the second half then half again to .5% for the 3rd quarter, then divide that .5% by the 22 or so players that saw the field during the third quarter. That small percent number is Manziel's cut from that game.
Add the 31,992 per year for playing every game all game for a season to the 39,996 they make for being on the team and attending all the off-season lifts, practices, etc. Add those together and the starting Notre Dame Player is making 71,988 dollars a year. So minus the 61,000 dollar tuition, the player is making 10,988 dollars a season. So therefore, If a player starts his junior and senior year, he's making $21,976 dollars for playing college football.
In today's economy, 22,000 dollars will barely buy you a new car. With this system, there's still reason to work towards the NFL, but still a solid "job" for the average athlete who won't make the NFL. You can directly apply this to any other sport as well, simply taking the profit, using the percents and time played in each game. Will the amount be smaller for different sports and schools? Yeah, but if a team like Buffalo University plays a team like Ohio State and get's romped. Their players will get payed more for making a difference in that game then they will in a smaller less televised game. But you also have to remember their tuition at Buffalo would be significantly less than the Notre Dame tuition.
The college is happy because it's still taking 90% of the profit from each game. The player is happy because while his time is being consumed by football, he won't have the crippling debt that college puts upon it's students now-a-days, if he's not making money, and he will have a drive to do well in school (I.E. Keep his grades up to stay on the team.)
Thoughts? Problems?
