Conference Revenue Gap Widening

[UCFlagship]

Just thought provoking question, why does nobody complain that the value of Stanford or Duke or Northwesten scholarship is way way more valuable than one from a MAC or SEC school? If we really wanted a level playing field, every student athlete would get the same $75k or whatever, and have to pay for tuition which can be way different out of the $$$ received?

wow man just stop. this is embarassing

 

[JAFFX2]

wow man just stop. this is embarrassing

 

[80'sKnight]

Like most uninformed cfb fans your lack of knowledge of the UCFacts is leading you to false conclusions.

Since I'm a nice poster, I'll help you out.

• You're conflating TV $ with athletic budgets - they are not the same
• While UCF gets 1 / 15th of TV $$$ as other P6 schools we rank 53rd in all FBS athletic budgets.
• Our budget
• The disparity between our Athletic budget and the #1 is 1 / 4 th.
• The very bottom of FBS to the #1 Athletic budget is 1 / 10th vs the ~ 1 / 100th of the TV $ disparity
• You're making an assumption some top prospects don't go to the schools with the top 10 athletic budgets already. They almost all do with very rare exception like Ed Oliver.
• So the money disparity is not between us and Texas A&M is not 10 or 20 times

In the end there are basic laws of economics that ensure your chicken little fears when it comes to paying players - which is really just a stipen like we have and allow players to make money off of their likeness - won't happen.

I don't have time to teach you economics. But just look at FBS coaches salaries that are currently not capped. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

Hopefully, this summary of real numbers opens your eyes.

#UCFacts

Just 1 question about our budget, if we pay players what will we give up in our athletics? We couldn't possibly pay players without ending spending in other things. Is that right? I mean we don't have a budget surplus do we? That would mean we'd have to make drastic cuts wouldn't we?

I'm on the fence about it, I just hate how those asking for us to pay the players seem to ignore the incredible value of education and the million plus lifelong salary it gives a player who gets a college education. If we go to pay them, then we shouldn't ask them to get an education. What the hell, just pay them and get any kind of player we can even if he can't read. Just separate the university from athletics.

 

[BlakNGoldAllDay]

Just 1 question about our budget, if we pay players what will we give up in our athletics? We couldn't possibly pay players without ending spending in other things. Is that right? I mean we don't have a budget surplus do we? That would mean we'd have to make drastic cuts wouldn't we?

I'm on the fence about it, I just hate how those asking for us to pay the players seem to ignore the incredible value of education and the million plus lifelong salary it gives a player who gets a college education. If we go to pay them, then we shouldn't ask them to get an education. What the hell, just pay them and get any kind of player we can even if he can't read. Just separate the university from athletics.

Agree. Just start a league where you pay players until they are ready for NFL. Why go to school?

 

[G8RLegist]

A basic economics paradox is that people only focus on the costs or benefits that suits their point.[/QUOTE
.

Just to clarify, that is neither a paradox, nor a basic tenet of economics.

 

[G8RLegist]

Most (almost all) university athletic depts. are legally set up where they can't make a profit.

Are you combining the athletic associations connected to the schools with the actual athletic departments? If so, that is absolutely incorrect. In fact, I would be very interested to read the legislation or operational documents that prevent a school from generating net revenue from their athletics.

 

[Knight_Light]

Like most uninformed cfb fans your lack of knowledge of the UCFacts is leading you to false conclusions.

Since I'm a nice poster, I'll help you out.

• You're conflating TV $ with athletic budgets - they are not the same
• While UCF gets 1 / 15th of TV $$$ as other P6 schools we rank 53rd in all FBS athletic budgets.
• Our budget
• The disparity between our Athletic budget and the #1 is 1 / 4 th.
• The very bottom of FBS to the #1 Athletic budget is 1 / 10th vs the ~ 1 / 100th of the TV $ disparity
• You're making an assumption some top prospects don't go to the schools with the top 10 athletic budgets already. They almost all do with very rare exception like Ed Oliver.
• So the money disparity is not between us and Texas A&M is not 10 or 20 times

In the end there are basic laws of economics that ensure your chicken little fears when it comes to paying players - which is really just a stipen like we have and allow players to make money off of their likeness - won't happen.

I don't have time to teach you economics. But just look at FBS coaches salaries that are currently not capped. http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

Hopefully, this summary of real numbers opens your eyes.

#UCFacts

Just 1 question about our budget, if we pay players what will we give up in our athletics? We couldn't possibly pay players without ending spending in other things. Is that right? I mean we don't have a budget surplus do we? That would mean we'd have to make drastic cuts wouldn't we?

I'm on the fence about it, I just hate how those asking for us to pay the players seem to ignore the incredible value of education and the million plus lifelong salary it gives a player who gets a college education. If we go to pay them, then we shouldn't ask them to get an education. What the hell, just pay them and get any kind of player we can even if he can't read. Just separate the university from athletics.

Many are forgetting that players already receive $$$, as in the Cost of Attendance check, which ranges from $5,000-$6,000 per year (and rising annually too)

That of course is on top of their full ride room, tuition and board which can be worth up to $55,000 plus per year at private institutions or up to $30,000 per year for out of state public univ students.

If schools want to pay players more, give them a salary and not provide them tuition, room and board...and just make them professionals without having to attend or even enroll into classes.

 

[SCKnight]

Just thought provoking question, why does nobody complain that the value of Stanford or Duke or Northwesten scholarship is way way more valuable than one from a MAC or SEC school? If we really wanted a level playing field, every student athlete would get the same $75k or whatever, and have to pay for tuition which can be way different out of the $$$ received?

There would be no complaining. The value is what it is. Pay the players and let them decide whether paying $70,000 a year is worth it for a Duke degree. They get paid what they get paid, just like anyone else who works during school.

We already have a level playing field. A student gets a scholarship. If we pay the players the field will not be level. The Good players will get more money and the less athletic will get less. You get paid per your value, just like the real work place. So instead of having paid student athletes we will make millionaires from college semi-pro football players. If you get hurt? No more pay.

 

[JAFFX2]

Just to clarify, that is neither a paradox, nor a basic tenet of economics.

The irony is that almost every UCFhonors response is a paradox, but he is too dense, arrogant, and self absorbed to get it!

 

[ucfversusbcs]

Many are forgetting that players already receive $$$, as in the Cost of Attendance check, which ranges from $5,000-$6,000 per year (and rising annually too)

That of course is on top of their full ride room, tuition and board which can be worth up to $55,000 plus per year at private institutions or up to $30,000 per year for out of state public univ students.

I'd love to know more details behind this. Whats the limitations behind this? Are student athletes still holding up gas stations because the school isnt feeding them enough? Thats just some anecdotes ive heard on documentaries of course.

 

[Crazyhole]

Just to clarify, that is neither a paradox, nor a basic tenet of economics.

This made me laugh.

If there will ever be pay given to student athletes the checks will come directly from the NCAA to avoid a disproportionate advantage to the richer Athletic departments, and that money would have to be apportioned to schools based on media rights payments. A team like Ohio st would pay 20 times that a team like buffalo would, and for that reason it won't happen. The top 30 or 40 schools would be footing the bill for the lower 80 or 90 and that just isn't going to fly.