Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Per Yahoo Sports: Renegade Miami football booster spells out illicit benefits to players(ST/McIntosh named)

TeddyKGB

By TeddyKGB
in The Stadium

Pick one  

65 members have voted

  1. 1. Pick one

    • drastically reduce spending
      12
    • raise taxes on the rich
      1
    • NONE of the above - some combination of tax hikes and spending cuts is required
      52

Recommended Posts

KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
what a joke.

not that i think they should be paid to begin with. i can't stand some of the laws of this country. female sports (and almost every male sport. football is really the only money maker) cost money, they don't bring in money. people who don't understand that are dumb/sexist.

edit: since football isn't a 'male only sport', i'd be curious to see if lawyers could get away with it.

Football doesn't really make money. The problem is, the cost of sending a team to a bowl is often more expensive than the bowl payout. Plus paying the salaries of the coaching staff and paying for presidents and school administration/band/whatever to attend the bowl games. They don't get in for free. Plus,having to sell your share of the bowl game tickets. If you don't sell 'em, the program has to buy them.

Another reason why the BCS blows for college football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
Football doesn't really make money. The problem is, the cost of sending a team to a bowl is often more expensive than the bowl payout. Plus paying the salaries of the coaching staff and paying for presidents and school administration/band/whatever to attend the bowl games. They don't get in for free. Plus,having to sell your share of the bowl game tickets. If you don't sell 'em, the program has to buy them.

Another reason why the BCS blows for college football.

what?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/29/news/companies/college_football_dollars/index.htm

1.1 Billion in profit last year.

it makes a ton of money, what the hell are you talking about?

total revenue was 2.2 billion.

edit: to give you an idea, TCU was ranked 47th when measured with big conference schools and broke even. i'm not arguing that the expenses aren't up there, i'm saying there are plenty of places making money. and quite a few making a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
what?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/29/news/companies/college_football_dollars/index.htm

1.1 Billion in profit last year.

it makes a ton of money, what the hell are you talking about?

total revenue was 2.2 billion.

edit: to give you an idea, TCU was ranked 47th when measured with big conference schools and broke even. i'm not arguing that the expenses aren't up there, i'm saying there are plenty of places making money. and quite a few making a lot.

Link not loading for me. Is that gross, or net?

And by the way, 46 teams doing better than breaking even isn't that much money for the entire D1 population. Over half the schools are breaking even or losing. All the money is at the top.

EDIT: Leaving for practice. I could be wrong on the money issue. I'm open for that possibility. I don't follow that side of collegiate football all that much, admittedly. I care about the football side, but I do read on this stuff on occasion. nyways, I'm not going into hiding. I got practice then I'm working tonight, so I'll take my lumps tomorrow if I'm proven to be an idiot on this issue. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
Link not loading for me. Is that gross, or net?

And by the way, 46 teams doing better than breaking even isn't that much money for the entire D1 population. Over half the schools are breaking even or losing. All the money is at the top.

weird, works fine for me. here's the article:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The richest college football programs got richer in 2010, pocketing more than $1 billion in profits for the first time.

The profit for the 68 teams that play in the six major conferences was up 11% from the prior school year, according to a CNNMoney analysis of figures filed by each school with the Department of Education.

In the school year that ended in 2010, the vast majority of the schools in one of these deep-pocketed conferences posted a profit. Four of them broke even and only one -- Wake Forest -- reported a loss.

On average, each team earned $15.8 million last year, or well over $1 million per game.

They posted that jump in combined profit even though revenue rose by only 6% to $2.2 billion. That means the schools had a combined profit margin of 49%, enough to make any pro team owner green with envy.

Increasingly lucrative broadcast deals and strong ticket sales have been driving revenue. And, of course, not having to pay your athletes gives big-time college football the ultimate business model.

Bowl-eligible schools in the smaller conferences weren't nearly as profitable. Fifty-three schools split profits of $26 million. Eight lost money.

There was little change in the rankings of the most profitable schools. The University of Texas football program was once again the leader in both revenue, with $94 million, and profit, with $68 million.

Alabama is good enough to rank No. 2 in revenue and No. 7 in profits, while Georgia ranked No. 3 in revenue and No. 2 in profit.

Profits didn't always translate to victories on the field. Texas finished the season 5 wins and 7 losses, and players will be watching the bowl season on television this year. Georgia and Alabama are in small-dollar bowls this year.

But that won't necessarily be a big hit to their bottom lines, as payouts from the bowls are split evenly among all the teams in the conference, rather than going to the team that actually plays the game.

That split is a prime reason the major conferences will fight any effort to bring about a college football playoff system.

Texas Christian University and Boise State were the two small conference teams that met in the big-bucks Fiesta Bowl last year. But TCU's $20 million in revenue, while the most among the small conference schools, would have put it 47th among the big-dollar conference schools. And that $20 million in revenue was only enough to allow the TCU program to break even.

Boise State finished fifth in revenue among the small conference schools with $14.5 million, but it would be 63rd out of 68 among the major conference power houses.

That's the major reason TCU announced last month it would move to the Big East conference in two years

but your question about gross and net... either i'm confused, or your confused.

profit is what you have after expenses are subtracted out

revenue is what you have coming in (before you subtract out expenses/overhead/etc)

they had 1.1 billion in profit

2.2 billion in revenue

thats why i put profit in bold...

maybe i'm misunderstanding your question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebluefood

thebluefood

Posted
Posted

Some of you Miami fans and apologists crack me up.

Do you honestly think Charles Robinson (the author of this story) only talked to Shapiro about this? Don't you think he dug up records and talked to numerous other sources to corroborate Shapiro's spiel? Do you really think reporters only talk to one source before filing a story? Yahoo spent almost a year on this story before putting it to the presses. Everyone knows Shapiro is a bitter little Napoleon that wanted revenge. You don't base a whole story on that and Robinson didn't.

The evidence against Miami is absolutely damning. Players knew what Shapiro was doing, coaches knew about it...hell, it wouldn't even surprise me if people in the AD's office knew about it.

Miami is thoroughly and rightfully screwed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted

oh, and as for your 46 teams...

yeah, i know. thats why if they're going to pay people it'd have to be based on the money coming in. otherwise they wouldn't be able to afford to pay everyone. what is alabama suppose to give up money so bottom D1 schools can pay their players 500$ a game? that just wouldn't work...

which is why I don't think title 9 would be an issue. not even all football teams would be able to pay players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebluefood

thebluefood

Posted
Posted
I just don't care about any of this. The NCAA and the rules are a joke. It's time to pay the players, straight up, and stop making them go to school. The whole thing is ridiculous and has been for decades.

So..end varsity college football at universities? That's pretty what you're suggesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoeSkins

JoeSkins

Posted
Posted
Football doesn't really make money. The problem is, the cost of sending a team to a bowl is often more expensive than the bowl payout. Plus paying the salaries of the coaching staff and paying for presidents and school administration/band/whatever to attend the bowl games. They don't get in for free. Plus,having to sell your share of the bowl game tickets. If you don't sell 'em, the program has to buy them.

Another reason why the BCS blows for college football.

I believe you are recalling a lot of info from that article about how UConn was going to lose money from their BCS bowl game. That article was a little off-base for a couple of reasons. One, it's because UConn has no national fanbase and also the locals wouldn't travel to Arizona (trust me, I know, it's my alma mater). That's not really the case for your typical BCS-type teams. I imagine the Associated Press writer who put that out did so out of a desire to get rid of the BCS.

Additionally, even if the single bowl game itself doesn't yield profits, it can be thought of as a marketing expenditure. You also need to remember that there is a positive correlation between enrollment, tuition, and successful football programs. Every team's bottom line might not be very sexy, but there is no doubt that they help the schools on the whole. Add to that Tshile's point that certain teams themselves do produce huge profits. I can't imagine so many boards, presidents, and management would invest in football if it wasn't profitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B55Green

B55Green

Posted
Posted
Don't be too harsh. These aren't crimes, after all, they're NCAA rule violations. I understand that wrong is wrong, but the allegations listed aren't criminal (except for the prostitutes, lol).

Yeah, these college kids and colleges need to get these guys out of there, but also these players need to stop dicking around. It's sad to see this stuff, heard it could be "the end" for Miami. Don't think it'll happen, butt there's so much at stake for future people. Their football program, basketball, etc is gonna be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tibbidoe

tibbidoe

Posted
Posted
look... i agree that the NCAA makes a lot of money off these kids, and it's unfortunate that the money has made the NCAA (in general) shady.

but i get sick and tired of watching people cast aside a free education at a top university as 'nothing'.

these kids don't get paid nothing - they get a free, 4 year education and a degree (if they do what they're suppose to) at a top university. that is not 'nothing', in fact that's quite 'something'. it's something a ton of people would do almost anything to get.

stop acting like it's nothing. that's a slap in the face to anyone who's actually had to pay for an education.

if you want to pay them, then take away their scholoarships and give those to other people who actually appreciate the education. lets see how awesome it is to make 40-50k a year, and have to spend majority of it just to be at the school to begin with.

I didn't "cast aside" anything.

I know the scholarships are a big deal. Without them, most players wouldn't be in college to begin with. But without football, I doubt a lot of these guys would be in college anyway.

All I'm saying is that, these guys are given just enough to get by on during the school year, and if I understand correctly, aren't allowed to get jobs (that may be incorrect on my part. I'll acknowledge that). At the same time, they see their efforts making huge sums of money for the university (not just Miami, all schools).

Why is it unreasonable to think that these people could get some financial compensation in addition to the tuition?

Tuition doesn't cover going out on dates or parties. That's hardly vital, but it is a part of college life. But not every moment in college is going to revolve around sports and studies. These guys want to have a social life just like any other student. They do work hard for their schools. They pretty much have jobs. Pay them a bit for the effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
I didn't "cast aside" anything.

I know the scholarships are a big deal. Without them, most players wouldn't be in college to begin with. But without football, I doubt a lot of these guys would be in college anyway.

All I'm saying is that, these guys are given just enough to get by on during the school year, and if I understand correctly, aren't allowed to get jobs (that may be incorrect on my part. I'll acknowledge that). At the same time, they see their efforts making huge sums of money for the university (not just Miami, all schools).

Why is it unreasonable to think that these people could get some financial compensation in addition to the tuition?

Tuition doesn't cover going out on dates or parties. That's hardly vital, but it is a part of college life. But not every moment in college is going to revolve around sports and studies. These guys want to have a social life just like any other student. They do work hard for their schools. They pretty much have jobs. Pay them a bit for the effort.

I understand what you're saying, and you're correct they cannot get jobs. The NCAA doesn't want other companies benefiting by saying 'so and so works with us, do business with us', and they also don't want them getting favors by being employed to do no work.

I also completely agree with you that it's garbage how much money the NCAA makes off the backs of these kids, especially the way they turn around and preach that the student athlete is what they keep in their best interest. Their actions have clearly indicated otherwise; profits are what they keep in their best interest. i'm open to any solution to correct the problem; but i want real details. this blind 'pay the players' with no real recognition of the impact of doing that, or any other plan is just stupid. you might as well not even have an opinion if thats all you're going to say, because it's pretty worthless in the grand scheme of things.

if you're going to argue that they kids deserve a portion of that, then i would agree. i would also say they're no longer student athlete's, they're paid athletes. i would also guess that it may ruin the competitiveness of the NCAA with bigger schools having clearly better talent, as they would have more money to throw around.

i would have no problem with them having a 'sports' curriculum, where these people spend their day studying football, and then practicing with the coaches, if thats what the players want to do. no math, science, or english, unless they want to. they should also pay for that, and no longer receive scholarships since they're now being paid.

if they want scholarships, then they should play by the rules every other athlete plays under. you can't have it both ways. these schools are funded by tax payer dollars. i find it absolutely ridiculous how much tax payer money goes into funding ridiculous facilities, coaches, etc so that a university can try to field the best football/baskeball team while failing to graduate a good percent (way to high of a percentage btw) of those players.

if you want them to truly add the players to the business model, then so be it. but they are no longer student athletes when they do that, and they should no longer be treated like such. tax payer dollars for scholarships (and scholarships in general), facilities, uniforms, stadiums, and everything else should no longer be flowing to the universities for the use of sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paloosa

paloosa

Posted
Posted

I think that this is a touchy subject and the school is getting rich off the players so players are violating the rules, in their opinion, to get their fair share of the money. But if you violate those rules that you know are wrong then you should get punished for that. The problem is that the guys who got away with it never get punished because it is the players at the University at the time that get penalized. So the University of Miami should get punished for their part just like the booster is getting. Everyone thinks that he is just telling them this because he just wants to make it up so he can something out of it. If true then a lot of guys will be stained for it. If you want to stop this then have the University give part of the sales of the players jersey's to the players so they can do what they want with it. That way they have a little extra spending money to spend. The booster problem is something that really can't be helped because these guys provide money to the program and are very powerful. Are there any rules or a governing body that oversees boosters? They are going to continue to do this everywhere and until the NCAA solves the problem they are really penalizing the wrong people. The roblem is with the boosters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boss_Hogg

Boss_Hogg

Posted
Posted
What is the deal with Rocky? Anything with Santana or Hankerson?

Moss and Hankerson were not included in the list of players.

Rocky was mentioned as one of the beneficiaries, but it's unknown as to what extent.

---------- Post added August-17th-2011 at 01:12 PM ----------

So much for God's safety? Criminal.

nope, not at all. He was just doing what every other blue chip player in Miami was doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazy Levi

Crazy Levi

Posted
Posted
So..end varsity college football at universities? That's pretty what you're suggesting.

Err what? I'm no expert in college football. Just seems pointless to have "student atheletes" that aren't students at all. It's all a charade - why bother forcing everybody to go through it? Pay them and be done with it. Schools will still have their football teams - it's not like Michigan State fans really care if they players are attending class or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thebluefood

thebluefood

Posted
Posted
Err what? I'm no expert in college football. Just seems pointless to have "student atheletes" that aren't students at all. It's all a charade - why bother forcing everybody to go through it? Pay them and be done with it. Schools will still have their football teams - it's not like Michigan State fans really care if they players are attending class or not.

The pay, I understand.; but the part about not making them go to class pretty much negates the whole "college" part of college football. It's not like there haven't been, or aren't, college athletes (even in basketball and football) that don't excel in academics.

Giving the players a stipend/a cut of the profits I can understand. The rest? Not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazy Levi

Crazy Levi

Posted
Posted
The pay, I understand.; but the part about not making them go to class pretty much negates the whole "college" part of college football. It's not like there haven't been, or aren't, college athletes (even in basketball and football) that don't excel in academics.

Giving the players a stipend/a cut of the profits I can understand. The rest? Not so much.

But it's a joke. Virtually NO college football players of any real merit actually attend class on a regular basis, much less graduate. Anybody who is any good ends up in the NFL draft way before then anyway. So what exactly is the point?

If it's a farce, it's a farce. Time to stop pretending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...