C-USA schools ready to pay athletes beyond scholarship

[Harry]

Banowsky said it's too early to determine what model each university will adopt in paying full cost-of-attendance, but he said it will likely vary between schools.

"I think we'll compare notes. My sense is that cost-of-attendance is going to be what the university says it is because it is different in each place, and the federal guidelines contemplate it being different in each place," Banowsky said. "That's one of the problems with (an estimated) $2,000 (per athlete) across the board, is that it's arbitrary.

"Each institution is going to have to make a decision on allocating resources, so that's a TBD (To Be Determined). Basically, issues of equity will be part of the discussion. We'll figure that part out."

The NCAA Board of Directors will vote on Aug. 7 whether to accept a proposal from the Power Five conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, Pac-12, SEC) for autonomy in decision-making, including the group's push for paying full cost-of-attendance. Banowsky said C-USA could follow suit by voting on a similar measure in January and begin paying student-athletes full cost-of-attendance by the start of the 2015-16 academic year.

Read more: http://www.dnj.com/story/sports/2014/07/23/c-usa-schools-ready-pay-athletes-beyond-scholarship/13045867/

[oldguystudent]

Holy crap this is gonna get 'spensive!

[pastorgrant]

I think this is the right thing to do though. My brother played B-Ball in college and he had such a tough time getting by because they just didn't give him enough and they didn't let him get a job. I don't think it needs to go beyond what they're discussing here, but a little bit would go a long way.

[UNT 90 Grad]

We're gonna need some more Mean Green Club members.

[UNT90]

Hell, lets just get an SMU-esqe slush fund going and start the process early...

[greenminer]

The more it costs to do football, the more the price is passed on to the consumers.

At some point, the bubble bursts and people will not think it is worth it.

[Mean Green 93-98]

The more it costs to do football, the more the price is passed on to the consumers.

At some point, the bubble bursts and people will not think it is worth it.

And while some people are glad to help pay for an athlete's academic and housing expenses, they may not be as excited about giving them extra beer money.

[BillySee58]

I think this is the right thing to do though. My brother played B-Ball in college and he had such a tough time getting by because they just didn't give him enough and they didn't let him get a job. I don't think it needs to go beyond what they're discussing here, but a little bit would go a long way.

There are two major arguments made by athletes as far as getting paid.

1. The "Johnny Manziel" argument. The argument by the select few athletes at big, revenue generating schools like who you see on TV every Saturday wherever you are. The athletes who make their schools much more money than their scholarship and room and board. Guys who want to be paid because they don't believe it's fair for them and their teammates to only get $50-$100K in scholarships over their time in college. Because they realistically make their school millions. Those guys are likely going to be the reason NCAA athletes end up getting paid.

2. The "I can't have a job" argument. Athletes who, individually, either make their school marginally more money than their scholarships (like our program), make just about enough money as they earn in scholarships, or play in a sport where their school loses money off having that program (low attendance sports and almost all female sports). These kids want to be paid not because of the injustice of how much profit they're actually generating for the school, but because they are hurting on cash and can't work because of the amount of practice time their sport takes up.

The schools is paying for their books, tuition, housing, meals, and snacks. All the essentials. If they need money after that either their parents should help out, if the parents can't help out they should be able to apply for a grant, or take out a loan.

With all the essentials paid for, if a kid in that range where the parents make too much money for a grant but can't help their kid out were to take out a $5000 loan he'd have money to last him throughout college. With all meals paid for and housing paid for, $5000 to go buy a video game here or go out to eat at a restaurant with friends there should be able to last a kid throughout college.

To have a degree and graduate college under $10K in debt is very difficult. Almost unheard of if your parents can't help you out at all (like the example mentioned) yet make too much money for grants. Even for college kids who have good jobs. Rent, books, and food are expensive, so to have money left over to pay a significant portion of their tuition is just asking too much.

I think the NCAA should start some sort of loan and grant program with academic incentives. For example, with a kid gets no help from their parents yet they make too much money to allow their student-athlete child to qualify for a grant, that kid takes out a $5000 loan.

If that kid graduates, part of the loan is forgiven. If a kid makes Dean's list or the conference honor roll, part of the loan is forgiven. If the kids put in the work in the classroom he would graduate with a very minimal debt, considering he had no financial help from his parents. And he would've been able to live comfortably throughout college and have that and education paid for. That just doesn't account for if guys like Johnny Manziel want to make the money they make for their school.