Nigel Hayes takes case against NCAA to ESPN College GameDay Set

[Da-news-now]

Nigel Hayes isn’t afraid to be outspoken about his beliefs — like them or not. This much has been true nearly his entire career as a Wisconsin Badger men’s basketball player.

His longest-standing target has been the NCAA as a whole, with Hayes being a named plaintiff in an ongoing lawsuit in an attempt to allow student-athletes to be paid.

With that suit on-going, Hayes has continued to be outspoken on the topic in his own way. He has been snipping on Twitter…

The @bigten made nearly $450 million.

My scholarship is about $160,00.

If only there was enough money to pay us.. pic.twitter.com/EPV1d0I16X

— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) October 14, 2016
​

…and on Saturday he used the platform of ESPN’s famed College GameDay program to protest his “broke college athlete” mantra.

Nigel Hayes has arrived at GameDay and, of course, he has a sign. @darrenrovell pic.twitter.com/tMd5Vk4zT9

— Badger Beat (@BadgerBeat) October 15, 2016
​

No doubt Hayes passionately believes in his positions on this and a number of other topics. At least he is willing to think about things and articulate his beliefs strongly.

The post Nigel Hayes takes case against NCAA to ESPN College GameDay Set appeared first on Madtown Badgers.

Continue reading...

 

[TW]

If you look at programs like Wisconsin, and several others, you can argue that paying athletes is viable. That said, if you look at the mid and lower level teams in DI, it's not an option. What Nigel, and so many other activists in this area don't consider is that only about 24 DI schools actually cover the costs of sports through revenue generated from the sports. That means that of the top 120 teams, which everyone considers part of the equation, 80% lose money. Despite that, Nigel Hayes and other athletes consider that their $160,000 education package isn't enough to compensate them for their time. I call BULL on this! I think it's a great deal! The average college student leaves college that far in debt, and ends up spending half or more of their life paying off the damned debt. Yet, these gifted kids feel so "entitled" to their cut of the pie that they'd destroy sports in all DI schools to put money in their own pockets.

To be honest, I think the NCAA should do something completely the opposite. I think they should force incoming college athletes to sign an agreement that says that the school owns their services for the next four years, and they can't jump out of school after one "tune-up year," and hit the pros, like we see with the University of Kentucky basketball program, as well as Duke and Maryland. These guys should be "ineligible to play pro" until such time as their incoming class graduates from college. Want to play hardball? Maybe the schools should.

I look at all those lower level DI teams, and think of how teams like New Mexico University, and those that show up at Camp Randall Stadium to take a beating early in the college football season, just to survive. There's a reason the Badgers and other high profile teams have so many home games. They have them because they give big time "show up money" to this week's "cannon fodder," while they tune up for their big time schedule. For these lower level teams, that $500,000 or better show up money is enough to help them survive. Get two, three games like that, and they make it through the season.

No Nigel! Love how you play basketball, but if you think you want to be "paid" for the free ride in college, piss off. You're obviously not a bit concerned for the thousands of athletes in so many sports that would lose that opportunity for a scholarship, that gets them a chance to get a college degree.

My opinion of Hayes has diminished one hell of a lot over this issue. Sorry Nigel. It ain't all about you. It's about those thousands of kids who get a chance to go to college, and better themselves, thanks to scholarships, full or partial, that make it possible.

I'll root for the Badgers, but Nigel? PISS OFF!

Why Nigel Hayes is wrong!

 

[FlaPack]

If you look at programs like Wisconsin, and several others, you can argue that paying athletes is viable. That said, if you look at the mid and lower level teams in DI, it's not an option. What Nigel, and so many other activists in this area don't consider is that only about 24 DI schools actually cover the costs of sports through revenue generated from the sports. That means that of the top 120 teams, which everyone considers part of the equation, 80% lose money. Despite that, Nigel Hayes and other athletes consider that their $160,000 education package isn't enough to compensate them for their time. I call BULL on this! I think it's a great deal! The average college student leaves college that far in debt, and ends up spending half or more of their life paying off the damned debt. Yet, these gifted kids feel so "entitled" to their cut of the pie that they'd destroy sports in all DI schools to put money in their own pockets.

To be honest, I think the NCAA should do something completely the opposite. I think they should force incoming college athletes to sign an agreement that says that the school owns their services for the next four years, and they can't jump out of school after one "tune-up year," and hit the pros, like we see with the University of Kentucky basketball program, as well as Duke and Maryland. These guys should be "ineligible to play pro" until such time as their incoming class graduates from college. Want to play hardball? Maybe the schools should.

I look at all those lower level DI teams, and think of how teams like New Mexico University, and those that show up at Camp Randall Stadium to take a beating early in the college football season, just to survive. There's a reason the Badgers and other high profile teams have so many home games. They have them because they give big time "show up money" to this week's "cannon fodder," while they tune up for their big time schedule. For these lower level teams, that $500,000 or better show up money is enough to help them survive. Get two, three games like that, and they make it through the season.

No Nigel! Love how you play basketball, but if you think you want to be "paid" for the free ride in college, piss off. You're obviously not a bit concerned for the thousands of athletes in so many sports that would lose that opportunity for a scholarship, that gets them a chance to get a college degree.

My opinion of Hayes has diminished one hell of a lot over this issue. Sorry Nigel. It ain't all about you. It's about those thousands of kids who get a chance to go to college, and better themselves, thanks to scholarships, full or partial, that make it possible.

I'll root for the Badgers, but Nigel? PISS OFF!

Why Nigel Hayes is wrong!

Could not disagree with you more. Without the athletes you have no TV rights deals at the level they are. As to revenue I'm not buying it

In 2018, Big Ten schools will receive roughly $17.8 million just from half of the conference’s first-tier rights, not even including revenue from the Big Ten Network. If the rest of the first-tier rights are sold for a similar package, each Big Ten school will receive roughly $35 million in first-tier rights alone

Now let's factor in merchandise sales. Shoe contracts. Booster donations.

As to signing players to contracts hell no. Not until the NCAA guarantees a full 4 year scholarship and forces coaches to stay for the length of their contract. And what about the salaries of head coaches? Maybe there should be a cap on their earnings in line with revenue

The NCAA uses player images for monetary gain. Schools sell jerseys. But what does the kid get out of it. $0. Having a a high profile athletic program also increases alumni donations. Increases enrollment. Who benefits from that.?

Buy games are a double edge sword. Most Power 5 schools will not take a home as and home from another Power 5? Why? It's not a revenue thing. It does not benefit them W/L wise.

TV rights deals have made conferences and schools billions. And the B1G leads the way.

 

[Dubz41]

It's easy to say the athletes deserve to get paid. Show me how it will work. If a walk on makes the team does he get paid? Does he get paid the same as a 4 star recruit? Should starters get paid more than reserves? Does the gymnastics team get paid? The same as a football player? Easy to say they deserve it, show me the way it's going to work. What sport is more important? Do they only split the gate revenue including TV $$? Like TW said- most colleges LOSE money.

 

[TW]

packinatl - You overlook the biggest problem of all. If you read the article, you'd see you're talking about a pipe dream. It isn't going to happen, and shouldn't.

I do agree with you that the 4 year guaranteed scholarship should be a fact. I also agree that coaches should be required to complete their contract. If you can't force them to finish out a contract, you simply - by rule - dock the school he's going to a certain number of scholarships offered for a given period of time. It has to be a high enough number to make signing a coach away is a tough choice. As for the player, as I've indicated earlier, they wouldn't be eligible to go pro until their class graduated - period.

The University of Wisconsin dropped baseball to fulfill their requirements under Title IX. Hockey is available in only a small number of colleges under Title IX. They can't afford to support it, because it means adding women sports programs to match the outlay.

Let's take this one step further. Let's assume that the college ranks are the equivalent of the minor leagues in baseball. The average college scholarship is worth roughly $40,000 a year. That's about the same amount of money paid to a kid playing baseball at an intermediate level. It's a wash, except the kid in college has the opportunity of bettering themselves through that education, and even if the athlete isn't good enough to go pro, they have the tools to make it in the real world.

This whole thing about the Power 5. They'd be nothing except five football conferences if they didn't have the opposition out there, to play. The expansion, and realignment of conferences to create more revenue is part of the need to generate more money to keep their massive programs afloat. Paying these kids will destroy the entire system.

Good luck with that. Title IX was enacted by Congress, because of gender inequality. Don't like it? Lobby Congress to change it, not a damned TV show.

 

[FlaPack]

I read the propaganda article from the NCAA. The most corrupt organization outside of Washington DC. And in their minds it s a pipe dream. But when in 5 years the Power 5 brake from the NCAA they have nobody to blame but themselves

Here is the solution :
1. Pay an across the board stipend to all scholarship athletes. Enough to live like a normal college student
2. Allow athletes to have endorsement deals. Their likeness is already being used to promote the schy/conference /NCAA
3. Allow athletes to gave legal representation on if they should stay in school or not. Let's not be blind. It's happening already so clean it up

How do you fund this? It's a joint effort by the conferences and the NCAA. Part t national TV revenue is used plus school merchandise sales.

 

[GBP4EVER]

Paying will always be a issue will have lawsuit if you pay scholarship kids and not walk on also have issues if you will pay men's football team but not ladies golf team or men's water polo.

 

[FlaPack]

If the NCAA denied an athlete t the right to work until his class graduates it's a major lawsuit waiting to happen. And it's far from a a pipe dream on stipend. Look at O Bannon vs NCAA or EA Sports va NCAA. Courts have already ruled against the NCAA in preliminary rulings in those cases.

One more issue on players signing contracts on LOI. Right now the LOI needs parental signature and it's a 1 year renewable agreement. No chance that changes.

 

[FlaPack]

Paying will always be a issue will have lawsuit if you pay scholarship kids and not walk on also have issues if you will pay men's football team but not ladies golf team or men's water polo.

As I said you pay all scholarship athletes a stipend. I can debate you pay revenue sports and not non revenue but I see both sides there

 

[griz145389]

One other point I like to bring up is that the cost of a scholarship is significantly less to a school than what it costs to go to that school. A 40000 scholarship does not cost anywhere near that much for the school.
A good first step would be eliminating the rules that prevent a player from getting paid while in school. If someone wants to give the players $500 to participate in an autograph signing, who cares? Second step is the schools paying the athletes. I don't think you can put a high minimum amount to pay the players, but a good starting point would be that the players pool of money should not be any less than what the coaching staff gets at a school.