Midstate01;1373831 wrote:I just think its funny you called them professionals.

and I say professionals becuase they are the ones out there each week as opposed to the people who just have a ticket or two to unload. If you can find the latter you can usually get a great deal.

What a joke. Start paying the players already. The idea that this "amateur" sport is charging upwards of $100 to sit on a 16" space on an aluminum bench to watch oten times mediocre opponents scheduled solely becaue they are that way with a coach getting paid millions of dollars a year is pathetic. The current model of revenue producing college sports cannot be sustained. Somethings gotta give. And G. Gordon Gee ain't going to be the one to figure it out.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1374795 wrote: And G. Gordon Gee ain't going to be the one to figure it out.

He figured out how to get himself over $1 million per year. Perhaps he's afraid player salaries will cut into his money?

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1374795 wrote:What a joke. Start paying the players already. The idea that this "amateur" sport is charging upwards of $100 to sit on a 16" space on an aluminum bench to watch oten times mediocre opponents scheduled solely becaue they are that way with a coach getting paid millions of dollars a year is pathetic. The current model of revenue producing college sports cannot be sustained. Somethings gotta give. And G. Gordon Gee ain't going to be the one to figure it out.

and people are willing to pay it. So whats the problem here? Basic economics.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1374795 wrote:What a joke. Start paying the players already. The idea that this "amateur" sport is charging upwards of $100 to sit on a 16" space on an aluminum bench to watch oten times mediocre opponents scheduled solely becaue they are that way with a coach getting paid millions of dollars a year is pathetic. The current model of revenue producing college sports cannot be sustained. Somethings gotta give. And G. Gordon Gee ain't going to be the one to figure it out.

Nobody is forcing you to pay a dime. Don't go if you're unhappy with prices.

GoChiefs;1374802 wrote:Nobody is forcing you to pay a dime. Don't go if you're unhappy with prices.

I don't go. My point is that this model is going to fail in its current form. THe colleges like OSU talk amateur out of one side of their mouths and act professional out of the other. Those two forces will collide to destroy the system as we know it.

It's been the same system for a long time.

If the demand (for tix) is there, the supply (price) will continue to escalate. Econ 101.

I paid $140 for my ticket to the Nebraska game and we had tremendous seats. I wouldn't mind tickets going up as then regular people would have more opportunity to go to games. The price gouging on StubHub is insane, and I don't trust scalpers cause you don't know if you'll get a fake

Buy from a scalper with a license around their neck and your good...

I've scalped the day of the game, eBay, Craigslist and always been safe. If your going the day of the Mae basically ask them what their charging then tell them what you will pay. Some scalpels will laugh at you others will cave because you have cash in your hand. I've got tickets they originally wanted 200$ a piece for $60 a piece

Drunk post

sportchampps;1375417 wrote:Buy from a scalper with a license around their neck and your good...

I've scalped the day of the game, eBay, Craigslist and always been safe. If your going the day of the Mae basically ask them what their charging then tell them what you will pay. Some scalpels will laugh at you others will cave because you have cash in your hand. I've got tickets they originally wanted 200$ a piece for $60 a piece

Drunk post

Agreed. NEver agree to the first offer they throw out. Ask how much....either haggle with them or tell them what you wanna pay and who knows what will happen.


I am not for paying the players. How would it all work out?
Of course there would be a cap on what is paid, and they all would have to be paid the same.

What happens for other colleges that arent as big or generate as much revenue?

I am for a scaled system for athletes. You pick one of the plans.

1. Full scholarship. As they are getting now
2. 75% of schooling paid. You fit the bill for the rest (loans if you need be) and 25% of the value in a stipend.
3. 50% of it paid. 50% in stipends.

As a player/family you pick which one you are going to go with.

thavoice;1376873 wrote:Agreed. NEver agree to the first offer they throw out. Ask how much....either haggle with them or tell them what you wanna pay and who knows what will happen.


I am not for paying the players. How would it all work out?
Of course there would be a cap on what is paid, and they all would have to be paid the same.

What happens for other colleges that arent as big or generate as much revenue?

I am for a scaled system for athletes. You pick one of the plans.

1. Full scholarship. As they are getting now
2. 75% of schooling paid. You fit the bill for the rest (loans if you need be) and 25% of the value in a stipend.
3. 50% of it paid. 50% in stipends.

As a player/family you pick which one you are going to go with.

Not a bad system. Don't forget though that athletes already get a monthly stipend of around $1,200 with a full scholarship. $1,200 in Columbus is enough for a nice apartment, a lease on a nice car, eating out multiple times a week, and probably a down payment on a house. Not to mention half the athletes don't pay for anything at bars, get free meal plans, free personal training, free team gear, any girl they want(real ones, not Te'os), etc. Not a bad deal, sign me up if no one likes the current system.

sleeper;1376883 wrote:Not a bad system. Don't forget though that athletes already get a monthly stipend of around $1,200 with a full scholarship. $1,200 in Columbus is enough for a nice apartment, a lease on a nice car, eating out multiple times a week, and probably a down payment on a house. Not to mention half the athletes don't pay for anything at bars, get free meal plans, free personal training, free team gear, any girl they want(real ones, not Te'os), etc. Not a bad deal, sign me up if no one likes the current system.

Yeah..I am not sure what they all get right now as far as a stipend. I am not a fan of paying them outright though just because the program makes alot of money. I know they work year around in the weight room and other activities but lets not forget the scholarship. Most of the kids who attend college are riddled with debt for a very long time. When you add in the interest that is also paid on student loans that most kids have to pay back that also adds into how they benefit from the scholarship.

You know what comes next if they do pay them......why do the starters get the same as teh 4th string RB?

thavoice;1376895 wrote:Yeah..I am not sure what they all get right now as far as a stipend. I am not a fan of paying them outright though just because the program makes alot of money. I know they work year around in the weight room and other activities but lets not forget the scholarship. Most of the kids who attend college are riddled with debt for a very long time. When you add in the interest that is also paid on student loans that most kids have to pay back that also adds into how they benefit from the scholarship.

You know what comes next if they do pay them......why do the starters get the same as teh 4th string RB?

I think the current system is fine except I think the players shouldn't have to follow all these rules regarding benefits. If some coach or booster wants to take a recruit out to dinner, then so be it. It might actually increase competitiveness on the field because shitty schools can suddenly start attracting players with lavish benefits and/or cash.

sleeper;1376952 wrote:I think the current system is fine except I think the players shouldn't have to follow all these rules regarding benefits. If some coach or booster wants to take a recruit out to dinner, then so be it. It might actually increase competitiveness on the field because ****ty schools can suddenly start attracting players with lavish benefits and/or cash.

I think the current system is fine as well....but dont like what you are proposing at all.

thavoice;1376959 wrote:I think the current system is fine as well....but dont like what you are proposing at all.

Why not? It's irrelevant to me if people want to spend their own money to watch a player at their school for 3-4 years.

sleeper;1376952 wrote:I think the current system is fine except I think the players shouldn't have to follow all these rules regarding benefits. If some coach or booster wants to take a recruit out to dinner, then so be it. It might actually increase competitiveness on the field because shitty schools can suddenly start attracting players with lavish benefits and/or cash.

sleeper;1376982 wrote:Why not? It's irrelevant to me if people want to spend their own money to watch a player at their school for 3-4 years.

It would in all likelihood decrease competitive balance. Generally the bigger schools will be the ones with more boosters who are willing to spend money on recruits to go to the school. You can see that now just through donations.

Also, the other problem with this is it gives rise to more connections of athletes and shady individuals looking to pay-off students to throw a couple points here or there for betting purposes.

Fly4Fun;1377085 wrote:It would in all likelihood decrease competitive balance. Generally the bigger schools will be the ones with more boosters who are willing to spend money on recruits to go to the school. You can see that now just through donations.

Also, the other problem with this is it gives rise to more connections of athletes and shady individuals looking to pay-off students to throw a couples points here or there for betting purposes.

Then let them. We shouldn't be punishing college individuals for Vegas and like I said if someone wants to drop money to watch an athlete compete at their school for a couple years let them.

sleeper;1377087 wrote:Then let them. We shouldn't be punishing college individuals for Vegas and like I said if someone wants to drop money to watch an athlete compete at their school for a couple years let them.

Are you serious clark? You think it's fine for competitive balance for people to pay off athletes to take a dive or shave points in a win or even throw a whole game?

Fly4Fun;1377091 wrote:Are you serious clark? You think it's fine for competitive balance for people to pay off athletes to take a dive or shave points in a win or even throw a whole game?

No. I don't think the NCAA should be protecting Vegas and their money making machine. The practice of throwing games in exchange for cash is only propagated because of Vegas. I'm not saying Vegas shouldn't be allowed to host bets for college games but they do so in mind knowing that athletes have the ability to throw a game in exchange for money. The market will essentially regulate itself and eliminate sports betting on college all together. I love it!

sleeper;1377100 wrote:No. I don't think the NCAA should be protecting Vegas and their money making machine. The practice of throwing games in exchange for cash is only propagated because of Vegas. I'm not saying Vegas shouldn't be allowed to host bets for college games but they do so in mind knowing that athletes have the ability to throw a game in exchange for money. The market will essentially regulate itself and eliminate sports betting on college all together. I love it!

I think you're being a tad naive in this regard. It's not about protecting Vegas, it's about protecting the integrity of athletics. Even assuming that enough people throw games that the legitimate business of Vegas stops betting on college sports (by the way, that would have to be a HUGE number to discourage it), there would still be illegal gambling that occurs all over the country that would still influence the throwing of games. There will ALWAYS be people willing to bet on games, and as such there will be people who want to control the outcomes of the games to insure their bets.

Fly4Fun;1377102 wrote:I think you're being a tad naive in this regard. It's not about protecting Vegas, it's about protecting the integrity of athletics. Even assuming that enough people throw games that the legitimate business of Vegas stops betting on college sports (by the way, that would have to be a HUGE number to discourage it), there would still be illegal gambling that occurs all over the country that would still influence the throwing of games. There will ALWAYS be people willing to bet on games, and as such there will be people who want to control the outcomes of the games to insure their bets.

What's to stop them from throwing a game now? Nothing. LOL EZ

I prefer the comfort of my own home. Ridiculous to pay that price.

sleeper;1377113 wrote:What's to stop them from throwing a game now? Nothing. LOL EZ

What's to stop them? The desire to win. Their teammates. Societal norms. There are many things. But the real point is there is NOTHING motivating them to throw a game as it currently stands. But if a booster starts paying a kid to throw games, the motivation is now there.

Fly4Fun;1377126 wrote:What's to stop them? The desire to win. Their teammates. Societal norms. There are many things. But the real point is there is NOTHING motivating them to throw a game as it currently stands. But if a booster starts paying a kid to throw games, the motivation is now there.

Is the fact that sports betting is legal in England enough motivation for soccer clubs to throw matches? No.