Discussion in 'Football' started by BranMart, May 1, 2019.
How big is Hutson Mason’s nfl check?
Every bit as big as Brendan Douglas' check
Great chance relative to other schools maybe, but no greater than if the player had gone somewhere else and definitely not a GREAT chance in general.
And when you're a random, Walmart fan of the dwags, there is a great chance you might be cashing welfare checks soon enough!
The fact you have to do thing X to achieve goal Y, does not mean X is not voluntary.
I don't believe S/A's are prohibited from holding jobs...? Where did you get that from? They are prohibited from holding jobs that are not available to the general student population, and they are prohibited from getting paid to play their sport.
If by “NFL player” you mean “lives in his mom’s basement” then yeah, that’s who I meant
Division 1 athletes cannot work while their sports are in season. You can Google it for proof but here is at least one link.
I did not know that. That seems like a strange rule — not that most players would have time for a job anyhow.
Think about how many students on academic scholarship function as RA's in their dorms. The athletes can't do that or perform a function a couple of hours per week manning the front desk in the library (or some other similarly easy job where they could not only study but earn spending money).
Think about how many students on academic scholarships have multiple scholarships that actually pay them more than the cost of tuition, books, etc and they end up having some left over for spending money. The athletes have to return those, as the author of that article explains.
There are a lot of stupid rules that were put into place when schools like Oklahahoma were found to be paying their players to cut the grass...when their field was artificial turf. In the NCAA's infinite wisdom, instead of coming down with the hammer on every school they found breaking the rules, they decided to enact Draconian policies that hurt future players...all because they're never going to really step hard on the ones they find cheating if that school is a major source of income for the NCAA.
It's the exact opposite. The likelihood of a dwag gaining marketable skills at uGA (outside of football) is so remote that they need to make that cash in college because once they are out their options are limited.
That article was written before the 'full cost of attendance' changes were implemented. Now athletes do get spending money.
Nevertheless, I wonder what the rationale is for prohibiting in-season jobs. I can see why coaches would prohibit it, but I don't see why in-season jobs put amateurism more at risk than out-of-season jobs.
I didn't know any students with scholarships that provided funding beyond tuition. Such scholarships may exist but are extremely rare. On campus jobs pay öööö. There is no way you could pay full tuition plus room and board with an on campus job; there aren't enough hours in the day. Athletes are compensated with tuition plus room and board and now a small stipend. Some are under-compensated but the vast majority (all non-revenue sports plus "non-contributing" members of revenue sports) are actually over-compensated.
They also have to get summer jobs approved. I have a former player who had a position lined up as a union electrician's apprentice for the summer and the NCAA finally approved it...in the middle of July. Even though he had applied to get it approved in April when he landed the job. He was able to work for about 6 weeks before he had to quit and start back to school.
Some of the stuff you hear about from people first hand is just nuts the way the NCAA functions.
Well, I have two friends who actually made money going to school because of the amounts of their scholarships. One did it both as an undergrad at Emory and then as a grad student with a fellowship for his EE masters at Clemson.
And if you think players are over compensated, especially football players, I'm just gonna go out on a limb and guess you probably weren't a college athlete, LOL.
Grad students in the sciences frequently have a stipend in addition to waived tuition so yes they do make money in exchange for working in a lab or as a TA. And yes most collegiate athletes are over-compensated given that no one pays to see their performances. I don't say this to demean their effort or accomplishments but the system we have is based in socialism, the same pay for everyone regardless of market value.
Cmon man, grad students "make money" all the time.
Most full ride undergrads theoretically can "make money" if they live cheaper than the room&board portion.
How many student athletes who are grad students are allowed to 'make money' like that?
Spoiler alert: the answer is zero.
And that was my exact point. It ain't apples-to-apples comparisons unless you remove those restrictions.
We could only work during the summer months and the jobs were arranged and approved through the GTAA. We were told one reason is so that rich alumni could not employ SA's at high wages for little work and be in violation of NCAA recruiting rules to get and keep athletes.
"Make money" by living like a pauper? They sure can. Obviously it is harder to live extremely pauper because some of the benefits are not cash, like food at the Edge.