RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

NCAA = Soviet Union?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8835



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 11:42 am    ::: NCAA = Soviet Union? Reply Reply with quote

Kind of interesting.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/john-calipari-ncaa-soviet-union/


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 12:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Quote:
Among his ideas presented in "Players First: Coaching From the Inside Out," which is scheduled to be published on Tuesday, the WSJ reported that Calipari presents a 13-point plan for NCAA reform. Among them:

• Players should receive stipends of $3,000 to $5,000;

• The NCAA should cover eligible players' insurance premiums;

• Athletes should be able to accept loans up to $50,000 against future earnings;

• If a coach leaves an institution, players should be able to transfer from that program without having to sit out a season;

• Athletes should be allowed one round-trip flight home every year


The stipends and round trips all sound fine and dandy, but if that is done for every single student-athlete, how much money is that going to cost? There is NO WAY most schools can afford that kind of extra money...

The future earning loans is a very tricky subject...who would be eligible? I mean, if I'm a regular student, I sure as hell can't take out a loan against my future earnings. Do you have to be a starter? Do you have to be on a top 25 team? Do you have to be an All-American?

The transfer thing I have no problem with...I kind of like that change and it has been discussed quite a bit as it is.

Insurance premiums covered? I don't know how I feel about that one...need to think on it a little bit more I think.

Lastly...it's strange that so many of these players that seem to be "starving" (other thread) have their parents in attendance at nearly every game. If money is that tight, how on earth are they able to afford the travel to so many away games?

Honestly, I don't have that big of a problem with some sort of stipend for student-athletes, but I think it has to universal and required at all schools. Otherwise, you will further separate the haves and the have nots.


kool-aide



Joined: 09 Jun 2009
Posts: 1650



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 12:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
Quote:
Among his ideas presented in "Players First: Coaching From the Inside Out," which is scheduled to be published on Tuesday, the WSJ reported that Calipari presents a 13-point plan for NCAA reform. Among them:

• Players should receive stipends of $3,000 to $5,000;

• The NCAA should cover eligible players' insurance premiums;

• Athletes should be able to accept loans up to $50,000 against future earnings;

• If a coach leaves an institution, players should be able to transfer from that program without having to sit out a season;

• Athletes should be allowed one round-trip flight home every year


The stipends and round trips all sound fine and dandy, but if that is done for every single student-athlete, how much money is that going to cost? There is NO WAY most schools can afford that kind of extra money... There is money available. Of course, right now it mostly goes into the pockets of the bigwigs & others in charge. And the NCAA org itself. But really, there is a much easier option and one that allows the admins & coaches & NCAA to keep getting paid & has no Title IX implications. Remove many/most of the restrictions on athletes benefiting from their own likeness/image while in college or sell their own gear.

The future earning loans is a very tricky subject...who would be eligible? I mean, if I'm a regular student, I sure as hell can't take out a loan against my future earnings. Regular students are able to work at jobs without the restrictions athletes face. The ever popular example of the music major on a music scholarship not being prevented from doing gigs for pay is but just one example. And you already have coaches telling players (even non-revenue athletes) what they can & can't major in. So you know coaches aren't ok w/ even the 'acceptable' jobs.

Insurance premiums covered? I don't know how I feel about that one...need to think on it a little bit more I think. Not all schools deal fairly w/ athletes who are injured doing the work of athletics. Why should the next Kevin Ware have to pay the medical bills resulting for injuries sustained on behalf of the school.

Lastly...it's strange that so many of these players that seem to be "starving" (other thread) have their parents in attendance at nearly every game. If money is that tight, how on earth are they able to afford the travel to so many away games? Not every player has parents able to travel all over the country. And players who have children have other costs..


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 12:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
Quote:
Among his ideas presented in "Players First: Coaching From the Inside Out," which is scheduled to be published on Tuesday, the WSJ reported that Calipari presents a 13-point plan for NCAA reform. Among them:

• Players should receive stipends of $3,000 to $5,000;

• The NCAA should cover eligible players' insurance premiums;

• Athletes should be able to accept loans up to $50,000 against future earnings;

• If a coach leaves an institution, players should be able to transfer from that program without having to sit out a season;

• Athletes should be allowed one round-trip flight home every year


The stipends and round trips all sound fine and dandy, but if that is done for every single student-athlete, how much money is that going to cost? There is NO WAY most schools can afford that kind of extra money...

The future earning loans is a very tricky subject...who would be eligible? I mean, if I'm a regular student, I sure as hell can't take out a loan against my future earnings. Do you have to be a starter? Do you have to be on a top 25 team? Do you have to be an All-American?

The transfer thing I have no problem with...I kind of like that change and it has been discussed quite a bit as it is.

Insurance premiums covered? I don't know how I feel about that one...need to think on it a little bit more I think.

Lastly...it's strange that so many of these players that seem to be "starving" (other thread) have their parents in attendance at nearly every game. If money is that tight, how on earth are they able to afford the travel to so many away games?

Honestly, I don't have that big of a problem with some sort of stipend for student-athletes, but I think it has to universal and required at all schools. Otherwise, you will further separate the haves and the have nots.


I think the stipend thing is a done deal. My guess is that it likely won't be $5,000, and will be more like $2-3,000/yr, but the big five conferences are going to do it one way or the other for all of their athletes whether anyone else likes it or not. The impact that has, whether other conferences follow suit (or can afford to follow suit), and whether it splinters the competitive landscape remains to be seen, but it's going to happen, almost certainly within the next year.

As for health insurance, it's a real mishmash today. The NCAA provides catastrophic coverage for all athletes (I think the deductible ranges from $25,000 to $90,000 depending on the Division with I believe a $20 million lifetime max). Then it mandates that all athletes must have health insurance coverage, but doesn't say who pays for that insurance - school, parents, athlete. A lot of big schools provide the insurance. Many schools don't. I think schools ought to cover it, and they are free to do so today, but whether the NCAA should mandate what has to be included in a financial aid package is a difficult question. It probably should be something recruits ask before signing, but I doubt any of them do.

Since Calipari builds his teams entirely around one-year-wonders, it's no wonder that he doesn't care about transfer rules. But while endless free agency may sound great in practice, it's not that simple and could be chaotic.

I don't have any problem with the "one flight home" just as I think schools should be able to pay for parents to accompany kids on recruiting trips. But it is expensive and a lot of these rules exist to try to maintain some competitive balance. But again, a lot of schools simply can't afford it, and should that money be taken from educational endeavors if the athletic program itself isn't generating enough income? I doubt it. So again, what impact does that have on recruiting and the competitive landscape if a small number of schools can afford to offer this extra benefit and the rest can't?

The loan issue is another one that sounds good on its face, and it would be the lending institution that would bear the risk of the player didn't make the pros and defaulted. But it's highly susceptible to abuse. It may be easy in the case of a top 10 men's basketball player. Lots of people would be willing to make that loan, since either the NBA salary next year or the player's injury insurance policy can easily cover repayment. But what about the 4 star running back? His pro prospects are probably too speculative for any responsible bank to take the risk, but what about the small bank in Birmingham owned or run by an Auburn booster who tells the kids that they'll make the loan if only the kid commits to Auburn? Is the recruiting imbalance that could be created by relaxing these rules warranted?


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 1:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't understand the "just let players sell their autographs" stuff.

First, that doesn't solve a thing. If you allowed that, there probably aren't more than 20 football players and 5 or 6 basketball players who would actually collect anything. So how does that help the other 300 student athletes at the school.

Second, do you really want to turn recruiting into the wild west? So as a rich booster I can't just hand A'ja Wilson $100,000 if only she'll sign with my favorite school. But I can pay her $100,000 if only she'll sign my baseball cap. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Let's start a bidding war to see which school's boosters will pay the most for an autographed picture.

Oh, and if Hoopgurlz ranks you #97? Sorry, you're only worth ten bucks.

I'd really like someone to explain why they think that system would be beneficial. (or at least beneficial to anyone other than the tiny slice of players who would make a lot of money). How would it help (a) the 95% of student athletes for whom no one would pay for their autograph or (b) the sport itself.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1258



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 1:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I agree the NCAA is over the top in some of its rulings. But then rulings in American courts are also sometimes over the top. It would be nice to infuse a level of common sense. But also difficult to implement since there are always people trying to see just how far they can push the limits.

I don't really see how a players union helps the situation. Now pressure from school admins makes more sense to me.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.

I still don't understand why some posters seem to think there is a TON of money at all these schools...there just isn't. I mean, let's tell Coppin State, Canisius, Valparaiso, Northern Illinois, Montana State, Sacramento State, Texas State, Grambling, Florida International, High Point and Delaware State that they all have to pay $3,000 stipends to every single student-athlete, provide a round trip ticket to every single student-athlete and do this on top of all the other costs you have for your student-athletes and athletic department.

I mean, if that happens, you can probably kiss Division I-AA football (or FCS as it's known now) goodbye. If a school has 250 student-athletes, you are looking at $750,000 in stipend costs (at $3,000/each) and then conservatively another $75,000 in airline tickets for each student-athlete (figuring $300/ticket - which is probably too low nowadays).

They now have to come up with an additional $825,000 minimum to comply with those things. With countless budget issues at almost every university across this country, I don't see how this is even remotely possible for the vast majority of schools.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


even in the dark ages when I was in school, insurance was covered...unless it has changed since then.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.


I don't get your point?

If it is about that particular quote of mine, the point was that the schools took care of the insurance, just like they did the books, classes, room, board, etc.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.


I don't get your point?

If it is about that particular quote of mine, the point was that the schools took care of the insurance, just like they did the books, classes, room, board, etc.


Until they cancel the scholarship, then your health insurance is on you even if you got injured playing for the school.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 2:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.


I don't get your point?

If it is about that particular quote of mine, the point was that the schools took care of the insurance, just like they did the books, classes, room, board, etc.


Until they cancel the scholarship, then your health insurance is on you even if you got injured playing for the school.


With Obamacare now, who cares? That student-athletes bills will become the responsibility of all of us who pay in...


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 3:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.


I don't get your point?

If it is about that particular quote of mine, the point was that the schools took care of the insurance, just like they did the books, classes, room, board, etc.


Until they cancel the scholarship, then your health insurance is on you even if you got injured playing for the school.


With Obamacare now, who cares? That student-athletes bills will become the responsibility of all of us who pay in...


Not to get into Area 51 territory, but that's not accurate. The costs associated with people who don't have insurance are covered the same way they were before Obamacare - they have to pay their costs themselves (or have their families pay), and people who don't have the money to pay their costs (besides going into bankruptcy) have those costs spread out among all other users of health care through increased prices charged the rest of us by hospitals, doctors, etc.

What Obamacare has done for people who are in the usual student athlete age range is allow their parents to include them in their insurance until age 26. That's a big benefit, but the parents still have to pay the premiums for the additional insured, depending of course on the specific terms of their plans.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 4:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

beknighted wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
pilight wrote:
purduefanatic wrote:
Phil wrote:
I'd start with the insurance premiums. I thought that was already covered.


At the schools I worked at the health insurance was taken care of as a part of the scholarship...if that still happens I don't know as Obamacare has really caused a lot of that stuff to increase in cost.


Schools can revoke scholarships at any time for any reason.


I don't get your point?

If it is about that particular quote of mine, the point was that the schools took care of the insurance, just like they did the books, classes, room, board, etc.


Until they cancel the scholarship, then your health insurance is on you even if you got injured playing for the school.


With Obamacare now, who cares? That student-athletes bills will become the responsibility of all of us who pay in...


Not to get into Area 51 territory, but that's not accurate. The costs associated with people who don't have insurance are covered the same way they were before Obamacare - they have to pay their costs themselves (or have their families pay), and people who don't have the money to pay their costs (besides going into bankruptcy) have those costs spread out among all other users of health care through increased prices charged the rest of us by hospitals, doctors, etc.

What Obamacare has done for people who are in the usual student athlete age range is allow their parents to include them in their insurance until age 26. That's a big benefit, but the parents still have to pay the premiums for the additional insured, depending of course on the specific terms of their plans.


My point is their liability has a fixed point, not open-ended. And then when they turn 26, they just sign up for Obamacare and pay their deductible/co-insurance like the rest of us and then they are all set. No biggie...


beknighted



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 5:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

purduefanatic wrote:
[quote="beknighted
Not to get into Area 51 territory, but that's not accurate. The costs associated with people who don't have insurance are covered the same way they were before Obamacare - they have to pay their costs themselves (or have their families pay), and people who don't have the money to pay their costs (besides going into bankruptcy) have those costs spread out among all other users of health care through increased prices charged the rest of us by hospitals, doctors, etc.

What Obamacare has done for people who are in the usual student athlete age range is allow their parents to include them in their insurance until age 26. That's a big benefit, but the parents still have to pay the premiums for the additional insured, depending of course on the specific terms of their plans.


My point is their liability has a fixed point, not open-ended. And then when they turn 26, they just sign up for Obamacare and pay their deductible/co-insurance like the rest of us and then they are all set. No biggie...[/quote]

Sorry, I thought you meant something else.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8152
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 6:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

We had a thread on insurance on some site a couple of months ago and I looked at the UConn situation.

My recollection is that all students are required to provide themselves health insurance at their own cost. They can do that via their parents' policy, a student group policy, or an individual policy on the open market. If you are a scholarship athlete, you get a secondary policy at no cost for illnesses or injuries contracted in connection with your sports participation.


Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 6:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
We had a thread on insurance on some site a couple of months ago and I looked at the UConn situation.

My recollection is that all students are required to provide themselves health insurance at their own cost. They can do that via their parents' policy, a student group policy, or an individual policy on the open market. If you are a scholarship athlete, you get a secondary policy at no cost for illnesses or injuries contracted in connection with your sports participation.


That is correct, Glen. Our son is on our insurance but as an athlete he has secondary coverage paid for by the school.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/10/14 6:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

How does Title IX affect all this if the athletes are still directly associated with the schools.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
Dennis1361



Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 248



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/11/14 12:57 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I did not read all but at Stanford a scholarship is worth a lot of $$$ certainly more than good old state U athletic factory


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin