Nigel Hayes takes case against NCAA to ESPN College GameDay Set

UW Madison has 800 student athletes in 23 sports. Lets say we give each athlete $600 a month. That's $480,000 a month total. If you look at their budget where do you think the money is going to come from. Its not there and by the way gifts are included in their operating budget.
 
UW Madison has 800 student athletes in 23 sports. Lets say we give each athlete $600 a month. That's $480,000 a month total. If you look at their budget where do you think the money is going to come from. Its not there and by the way gifts are included in their operating budget.
As I have said it's a joint effort by the University, the conferences and the NCAA. There are billions of TV dollars generated each year.
 
The TV dollars are the big variable....could just be with that $ generated everything could be done....programs intact and students paid or then again maybe there isn't enough $. I don't assume to know those kind of numbers and would think you would have a better handle on that then the rest of us
 
UW Madison has 800 student athletes in 23 sports. Lets say we give each athlete $600 a month. That's $480,000 a month total. If you look at their budget where do you think the money is going to come from. Its not there and by the way gifts are included in their operating budget.
Would it be so bad if they got rid of some of the athletics programs? Would many people care if they got rid of the rowing program for instance? I know that is big for some ivy league schools, but I was not even aware Wisconsin had one before I just looked at what sports programs they have
 
Would it be so bad if they got rid of some of the athletics programs? Would many people care if they got rid of the rowing program for instance? I know that is big for some ivy league schools, but I was not even aware Wisconsin had one before I just looked at what sports programs they have

This is already happening. Wisconsin gave up baseball years ago, because of Title IX. Schools do it all the time. Look at hockey. There's not nearly as many DI schools participating because of Title IX.

It was mentioned that the wages, at $600 a month each participant would be $480K. That's just the stipend. Does anyone have any idea how much money it costs to run an individual athletic program? It isn't just "money in the door" like some people believe. There's the costs of a program. Everything from equipment, to facility, to staff, and maintenance. The costs are enormous.

This Article will give you a lot of detail about the cost of athletic programs, and it can't be pinned to the NCAA, or any other group. It's based on the reality of costs. Sports are something that will disappear from most colleges very quickly, if the pay for play people win their argument.

The whole idea is whacky. Nobody is even considering the "value" of a college degree. It's like people believe it's "owed" to athletes because they play there, and means nothing. It disregards the thousands of kids (40,000 neighborhood) at Wisconsin, and the money that comes from them to support programs that to them, mean very little. Pay for play also disregards the 23 Wisconsin based athletes who competed in the past Olympics. Their training ground, their participation in athletics, will disappear, except for the handful who are so gifted that they are lauded like conquering heroes.

Take a look at the cost of doing business in a small DI college. The University of New Mexico. The Lobos have it tough, and admit it. Most schools don't want to admit it, because you can't get talented athletes to attend a school that doesn't have the best of everything. It's a damned beauty contest because of what it is. NMU is losing their butts on sports, and has taken the necessary action, and is admitting it has no choice. NMU Budget Problems.

A few years back, I won't say when, I had a friend associated with their program, and he told me how they actually had run out of money for even the necessity of feeding these athletes. I'm not going to go into details, but let's just say that the coaches had to become pretty darned creative in getting these kids fed. They even had a problem with uniforms at that time, because they didn't have big time Armour All, or another sponsor handing them threads. Only the big guys got that.

The NCAA strives to make things competitive on a DI basis. Yet, there are teams in that group that are the bullies on the block. For a long time, Wisconsin was one of those programs that had sand kicked in their face by Michigan, OSU, and the other "elite" programs, because of money available to run systems. At least the way it's done now creates a degree of parity, and teams that work for it, have a shot at a bowl game often enough to make them solvent.

I, for one, will walk away from college sports, the day it all changes to pay for play. I was ticked off enough when the Michigan basketball scandal was exposed. Because they were such a high profile team, and a member of the elite, their sanctions weren't nearly as tough as they should have been. But, this speaks for what happens, when outside money is involved in programs. One way or another, either outside the school, or within the school, there's going to be corruption, and there's enough now, without nurturing it.

Just my opinion. Fire away! rt(
 
This is already happening. Wisconsin gave up baseball years ago, because of Title IX. Schools do it all the time. Look at hockey. There's not nearly as many DI schools participating because of Title IX.

It was mentioned that the wages, at $600 a month each participant would be $480K. That's just the stipend. Does anyone have any idea how much money it costs to run an individual athletic program? It isn't just "money in the door" like some people believe. There's the costs of a program. Everything from equipment, to facility, to staff, and maintenance. The costs are enormous.

This Article will give you a lot of detail about the cost of athletic programs, and it can't be pinned to the NCAA, or any other group. It's based on the reality of costs. Sports are something that will disappear from most colleges very quickly, if the pay for play people win their argument.

The whole idea is whacky. Nobody is even considering the "value" of a college degree. It's like people believe it's "owed" to athletes because they play there, and means nothing. It disregards the thousands of kids (40,000 neighborhood) at Wisconsin, and the money that comes from them to support programs that to them, mean very little. Pay for play also disregards the 23 Wisconsin based athletes who competed in the past Olympics. Their training ground, their participation in athletics, will disappear, except for the handful who are so gifted that they are lauded like conquering heroes.

Take a look at the cost of doing business in a small DI college. The University of New Mexico. The Lobos have it tough, and admit it. Most schools don't want to admit it, because you can't get talented athletes to attend a school that doesn't have the best of everything. It's a damned beauty contest because of what it is. NMU is losing their butts on sports, and has taken the necessary action, and is admitting it has no choice. NMU Budget Problems.

A few years back, I won't say when, I had a friend associated with their program, and he told me how they actually had run out of money for even the necessity of feeding these athletes. I'm not going to go into details, but let's just say that the coaches had to become pretty darned creative in getting these kids fed. They even had a problem with uniforms at that time, because they didn't have big time Armour All, or another sponsor handing them threads. Only the big guys got that.

The NCAA strives to make things competitive on a DI basis. Yet, there are teams in that group that are the bullies on the block. For a long time, Wisconsin was one of those programs that had sand kicked in their face by Michigan, OSU, and the other "elite" programs, because of money available to run systems. At least the way it's done now creates a degree of parity, and teams that work for it, have a shot at a bowl game often enough to make them solvent.

I, for one, will walk away from college sports, the day it all changes to pay for play. I was ticked off enough when the Michigan basketball scandal was exposed. Because they were such a high profile team, and a member of the elite, their sanctions weren't nearly as tough as they should have been. But, this speaks for what happens, when outside money is involved in programs. One way or another, either outside the school, or within the school, there's going to be corruption, and there's enough now, without nurturing it.

Just my opinion. Fire away! rt(

Your wrong on the "out the door" cost. All equipment is furnished by the apparel provider. In the case of Wisconsin that's Under Armour. As far as facilities it really a small portion. Many of the concessions are volunteer. As to staff it varies.

What happened at Michigan was why there needs to be a complete overhaul of the NCAA by laws and how compliance is handled. They are the most corrupt organization outside of DC. Do the kids get a college education? Yes and there is value to that. But it does not compare to the billions that the NCAA and conferences make. Just look at the B1G contracts with BTN and ESPN I'm not even including the CBS contract for basketball.
The NCAA is so hypocritical. They come down like bricks on USC for one violation but give Auburndale pass. Why? $$$$$. Remember the "Shoe Box scandal. What a joke

The NCAA has its own "pecking" order and it s all driven by revenue. Plain and simple. The premise that the NCAA cares about the kids is a joke.
 
For 2011-12, the most recent year for which audited numbers are available. NCAA revenue was $871.6 million, most of which came from the rights agreement with Turner/CBS Sports.
NCAA revenue supports intercollegiate athletics opportunities on national and local levels.
The total rights payment for 2011-12 was $705 million, or 81 percent of all NCAA revenue. Most of the remaining 18 percent of revenue came from championships (mostly ticket and merchandise sales).
While the amount of revenue is large, little of the money is retained by the NCAA national office. About 96 percent is distributed directly to the Division I membership or to support championships or programs that benefit student-athletes. The remaining 4 percent goes for central services, such as building operations and salaries not related to particular programs.
For 2012-13, NCAA revenue is projected at $797 million, with $702 million coming from the Association’s new rights agreement with CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting
 
  • Like
Reactions: TW
For 2011-12, the most recent year for which audited numbers are available. NCAA revenue was $871.6 million, most of which came from the rights agreement with Turner/CBS Sports.
NCAA revenue supports intercollegiate athletics opportunities on national and local levels.
The total rights payment for 2011-12 was $705 million, or 81 percent of all NCAA revenue. Most of the remaining 18 percent of revenue came from championships (mostly ticket and merchandise sales).
While the amount of revenue is large, little of the money is retained by the NCAA national office. About 96 percent is distributed directly to the Division I membership or to support championships or programs that benefit student-athletes. The remaining 4 percent goes for central services, such as building operations and salaries not related to particular programs.
For 2012-13, NCAA revenue is projected at $797 million, with $702 million coming from the Association’s new rights agreement with CBS Sports and Turner Broadcasting
Now let's factor in conference network deals.
 
This is already happening. Wisconsin gave up baseball years ago, because of Title IX. Schools do it all the time. Look at hockey. There's not nearly as many DI schools participating because of Title IX.

It was mentioned that the wages, at $600 a month each participant would be $480K. That's just the stipend. Does anyone have any idea how much money it costs to run an individual athletic program? It isn't just "money in the door" like some people believe. There's the costs of a program. Everything from equipment, to facility, to staff, and maintenance. The costs are enormous.

This Article will give you a lot of detail about the cost of athletic programs, and it can't be pinned to the NCAA, or any other group. It's based on the reality of costs. Sports are something that will disappear from most colleges very quickly, if the pay for play people win their argument.

The whole idea is whacky. Nobody is even considering the "value" of a college degree. It's like people believe it's "owed" to athletes because they play there, and means nothing. It disregards the thousands of kids (40,000 neighborhood) at Wisconsin, and the money that comes from them to support programs that to them, mean very little. Pay for play also disregards the 23 Wisconsin based athletes who competed in the past Olympics. Their training ground, their participation in athletics, will disappear, except for the handful who are so gifted that they are lauded like conquering heroes.

Take a look at the cost of doing business in a small DI college. The University of New Mexico. The Lobos have it tough, and admit it. Most schools don't want to admit it, because you can't get talented athletes to attend a school that doesn't have the best of everything. It's a damned beauty contest because of what it is. NMU is losing their butts on sports, and has taken the necessary action, and is admitting it has no choice. NMU Budget Problems.

A few years back, I won't say when, I had a friend associated with their program, and he told me how they actually had run out of money for even the necessity of feeding these athletes. I'm not going to go into details, but let's just say that the coaches had to become pretty darned creative in getting these kids fed. They even had a problem with uniforms at that time, because they didn't have big time Armour All, or another sponsor handing them threads. Only the big guys got that.

The NCAA strives to make things competitive on a DI basis. Yet, there are teams in that group that are the bullies on the block. For a long time, Wisconsin was one of those programs that had sand kicked in their face by Michigan, OSU, and the other "elite" programs, because of money available to run systems. At least the way it's done now creates a degree of parity, and teams that work for it, have a shot at a bowl game often enough to make them solvent.

I, for one, will walk away from college sports, the day it all changes to pay for play. I was ticked off enough when the Michigan basketball scandal was exposed. Because they were such a high profile team, and a member of the elite, their sanctions weren't nearly as tough as they should have been. But, this speaks for what happens, when outside money is involved in programs. One way or another, either outside the school, or within the school, there's going to be corruption, and there's enough now, without nurturing it.

Just my opinion. Fire away! rt(
I see your viewpoint, I just don't agree with it. I don't really care if the NCAA pretends there is parity or not in college athletics. The fact is there are only a handful of schools already that have the chance to be among the elite in each sport. There is not parity. Paying athletes that bring in so much revenue for the school is not going to change the parity because there already is none. And if a school can't support 30 different sports, I don't care if they get rid of many of them. Outside of the rowers and their families, does anyone care if their is a rowing team at Wisconsin? I would be in favor of trimming some of the programs, get teh athlete number down to 400-500, pay them all a stipend of $500 per month so that they can at least buys some clothes here and there and get food. Then, let those who have the ability to make more money be able to do so. If someone wants to give the players extra money outside of that fine. The fact is that happens now, and is usually only caught when someone gets burnt on a deal and snitches to the NCAA. Would some colleges shut down their programs? I'm sure they would. But those programs were not ones that were ever going to be successful anyways, and I really don't see why it is so important for the Iowa Vandals to field a football team. I believe teams can also voluntarily drop out of D1 and can go to D2. If they want to continue to field teams that would be an option for them, as the teams that would be considering that are not competitive at the D1 level anyways.
 
The reality is that in 5 years we will have another round of conference realignment. You will have the B1G, SEC, ACC, PAC 12 and some sort of a hybrid AAC & Big 12. Texas a and Oklahoma will leave for B1G or SEC a few others will follow. And it will all be driven by tv $$$. Those Power conferences will leave the NCAA and the NCAA will be left with the scraps
 
Back
Top