Arian Foster got 40-50k while playing at Tennessee

If the players are creating all this money, it should be easy enough for someone to start a minor football league and reap all the profits that are just waiting to be had. No one is doing that though because it is the brand of the schools that creates 99% of profit.
 
JTS said:
If the players are creating all this money, it should be easy enough for someone to start a minor football league and reap all the profits that are just waiting to be had. No one is doing that though because it is the brand of the schools that creates 99% of profit.
Click to expand...

if its the school's brand then why not just use real students and not spend millions of dollars chasing guys for their signature that often do not even qualify to enter the school based on the school's own admission standards?

while i agree the schools also add brand value (more the athletic history of the school than the academic history though) your 99% estimate seems downright dumbassish given the facts

also, you basically prove that athletics has added value because that brand (in athletics) was mostly built by athletics, not academics. rivalries are athletic rivalries, not math bowls

what the schools provide, mostly, is the infrastructure (stadia and other facilities like dorms and practice fields) and the regulatory system (via NCAA)
 
JTS said:
If the players are creating all this money, it should be easy enough for someone to start a minor football league and reap all the profits that are just waiting to be had. No one is doing that though because it is the brand of the schools that creates 99% of profit.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, then just let schools pay the athletes whatever they want. No one will pay them large amounts because they create so little profit. Problem solved.
 
JTS said:
If the players are creating all this money, it should be easy enough for someone to start a minor football league and reap all the profits that are just waiting to be had. No one is doing that though because it is the brand of the schools that creates 99% of profit.
Click to expand...

You could say the same thing about Tom Brady. "If it wasn't for the Patriots and the NFL, no one would care about him."

Alabama has money because fans give money. Fans give money because Alabama wins games. Alabama wins games because it has better coaches and/or players than other teams. Therefore it's the players and coaches that draw money, not Alabama.
 
gtphd said:
You could say the same thing about Tom Brady. "If it wasn't for the Patriots and the NFL, no one would care about him."

Alabama has money because fans give money. Fans give money because Alabama wins games. Alabama wins games because it has better coaches and/or players than other teams. Therefore it's the players and coaches that draw money, not Alabama.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it's a combination of both. It's a a symbiotic relationship.
 
gtphd said:
You could say the same thing about Tom Brady. "If it wasn't for the Patriots and the NFL, no one would care about him."

Alabama has money because fans give money. Fans give money because Alabama wins games. Alabama wins games because it has better coaches and/or players than other teams. Therefore it's the players and coaches that draw money, not Alabama.
Click to expand...

People would buy dishwashers even if Maytag didn't exist. If there were no Patriots or NFL, Tom Brady would be playing on some other team in some other league doing just fine.

Many people give money to Alabama whether they win or lose. More people give more money when they are winning. People not only give Alabama money in the form of ticket and merchandise sales, but sometimes just give them money. This would not be the case for the hypothetical Tuscaloosa Red Elephants Minor League Team.

Go out create minor league fooball teams, pay these players straight out of high school, and let's see how many people they draw to the stadium. IMO, you could not make a profitable business out of it that could offer players better compensation than they currently get from colleges.
 
JTS said:
Go out create minor league fooball teams, pay these players straight out of high school, and let's see how many people they draw to the stadium. IMO, you could not make a profitable business out of it that could offer players better compensation than they currently get from colleges.
Click to expand...

The way I see it working is that each NFL team has a D-league team that's exclusively 18-20 year olds who would be drafted out of high school. Those players would receive their signing bonus at age 18, would becoached by guys affiliated with the NFL team, they serve as the scout team for the NFL team, and they would receive NFL nutrition and conditioning. Then when they turn 21, they would go to the NFL team, be paid an annual salary based on their draft position, but would receive no bonus (it was already paid out).

Bet a bunch of 18 year olds would take that deal if offered.
 
The NFL could do that if they wanted to do, however they have elected not to do it. Why should the NFL be forced to pay for untrained, unqualified talent? That's not the way it works in any other profession. Should Coca-Cola be forced to hire high achieving high school graduates and provide them the MBA-equivalent education?
 
JTS said:
Go out create minor league fooball teams, pay these players straight out of high school, and let's see how many people they draw to the stadium. IMO, you could not make a profitable business out of it that could offer players better compensation than they currently get from colleges.
Click to expand...

I agree, but that's not legal justification for colleges to price fix the players' compensation. If the players really don't generate a significant portion of the revenue, then there should be no need for the schools to agree to limit compensation to the value of an education. Schools won't pay a lot for players if they don't generate revenue, so removing the cap shouldn't really change anything.

It's not like any school is going to say, "Well, I think adding player X will really only generate the school/AA $20k in revenue versus any other random player, but let's give him $200k anyway!" They'd only give players money commensurate with what they think the player will bring to the school in value, which, based on your theory, wouldn't really be anything substantial.

(Note: I think not having any type of cap would be a terrible, terrible idea. I'm just using it as an exercise to show how the value of the players to the schools actually is considerable despite the fact that the players wouldn't have any value without the schools themselves.)
 
Last edited:
JTS said:
Should Coca-Cola be forced to hire high achieving high school graduates and provide them the MBA-equivalent education?
Click to expand...

Coca-Cola does not have monopoly protection from the US Government.
 
Future Coca Cola employees also aren't barred from taking paid employment while still in school like scholarship athletes.
 
Future Coca-Cola employees (ie regular students) do not get free tuition, housing, food, and tutors nor can they reasonably be expected to afford them working part-time jobs.

Baseball players can go pro straight out of HS and on average they make about half what a Walmart cashier makes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top