Assistant coaches salaries

[Aging Booster]

I am NOT trying to make a point here, just reporting...
"The Buckeyes have upped the ante in assistant coach compensation this offseason, bumping their staff compensation to more than $7 million according to a report by USA Today's stellar sports contract reporter, Steve Berkowitz. That makes Urban Meyer's assistants the highest-paid staff in college football. How does it compare to your favorite team? Assuming you're a Maryland fan, it's more than twice what the Terps spent on assistants ($3.195 million). Two Buckeyes assistants will make more than $1 million, according to Berkowitz's data, and four will make more than $800,000.

None of DJ Durkin's assistants made more last season than the $650,000 paid to defensive coordinator Andy Buh, the 59th-highest paid assistant in the country. The next-highest was offensive coordinator Walt Bell, who ranked No. 103 at $500,000 before leaving for the same job at Florida State. Next-highest: defensive line coach Jimmy Brumbaugh and wide receivers coach Chris Beatty, who tied for No. 181 with $400,ooo salaries. Beatty was promoted to associate head coach this offseason; no contract details have been released yet for Beatty or any of Durkin's new hires, including new offensive coordinator Matt Canada.

Many of the programs spending more on staffing also have more money to spend. Maryland's ticket, concessions and merchandising revenues pale in comparison to Big Ten bluebloods like Ohio State and Michigan, and the school is also three years away from receiving a full conference revenue share. And Maryland ranked No. 32 nationally last year in assistant coach salary -- a spendy-looking investment considering the team's 4-8 record, although the team was hobbled by some major injuries. Four of those coaches -- Bell, Pete Lembo, Tyler Bowen and Anthony Tucker -- have left the program this offseason.

It's unknown how much Durkin's hires have been limited by any budgetary constraints -- Canada will be paid $700,000 by LSU next season, so he likely came at a below-market price. But one thing is certain: Ohio State just escalated the going rate for top coaching and recruiting talent."

 

[Sheffielder]

Obviously paying high salaries to coaches does not guarantee wins, but I do feel that winning coaches pay for themselves. I have absolutely no sympathy for any Big Ten school, including NU, that says they can't spare an extra $4 million or so for football or basketball coaches. We call them revenue sports for a reason, and this is a wealthy conference by any reasonable standard.

 

[willycat]

Obviously paying high salaries to coaches does not guarantee wins, but I do feel that winning coaches pay for themselves. I have absolutely no sympathy for any Big Ten school, including NU, that says they can't spare an extra $4 million or so for football or basketball coaches. We call them revenue sports for a reason, and this is a wealthy conference by any reasonable standard.

I have to totally agree. Also I know that Nu doesn't release salaries and doesn't have to as a private institution but wonder where they stand in the conference pecking order on pay toward assistants. Seem to remember that Barnett tried to make a point of raising assistants pay when he was here.

 

[gocatsgo2003]

I have to totally agree. Also I know that Nu doesn't release salaries and doesn't have to as a private institution but wonder where they stand in the conference pecking order on pay toward assistants. Seem to remember that Barnett tried to make a point of raising assistants pay when he was here.

Middle of the pack.

 

[Katatonic]

Obviously paying high salaries to coaches does not guarantee wins, but I do feel that winning coaches pay for themselves. I have absolutely no sympathy for any Big Ten school, including NU, that says they can't spare an extra $4 million or so for football or basketball coaches. We call them revenue sports for a reason, and this is a wealthy conference by any reasonable standard.

Helps when the talent is basically free (yeah, yeah, the cost of tuition, etc. - but that figure is bloated in the first place and it's a cost, when limited to the revenue sports, that's easily taken on by the schools).

The highest salaried strength and conditioning coaches are about to hit the $700k/yr mark.

What gets me is that most head coaches get bonuses for getting to and/or winning their conference championship games, getting to the playoff, etc. whereas the players don't get any added compensation for those extra games.

Even more ludicrous is that some coaches get bonuses for their players achieving certain academic goalposts.

 

[pawildcat]

Didn't Maryland join the B1G partially because their athletic department had money problems? With much greater attendance and athletic contributions, I would imagine Ohio State has a lot more money to spend on salaries than Maryland.

 

[NUCat320]

What gets me is that most head coaches get bonuses for getting to and/or winning their conference championship games, getting to the playoff, etc. whereas the players don't get any added compensation for those extra games.

Of course the players are compensated.

Backpacks, hats, watches, gift cards - or, a trip to the Wheel-of-Fortune-in-the-80s-style gift suite! (I'm almost certain Tommy Doles got a ceramic Dalmatian statue.)

Compensation!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sb...7/12/12/16740312/bowl-game-gifts-2017-players

 

[Aging Booster]

Helps when the talent is basically free (yeah, yeah, the cost of tuition, etc. - but that figure is bloated in the first place and it's a cost, when limited to the revenue sports, that's easily taken on by the schools).

The highest salaried strength and conditioning coaches are about to hit the $700k/yr mark.

What gets me is that most head coaches get bonuses for getting to and/or winning their conference championship games, getting to the playoff, etc. whereas the players don't get any added compensation for those extra games.

Even more ludicrous is that some coaches get bonuses for their players achieving certain academic goalposts.

If collegiate student-athletes are ever paid, college athletics has lost one fan forever. I know many friends who feel the same way. I love the tailgates with frat brothers from 40 years ago, the pageantry of the stadium, and the thrills of the game. However, all of that depends on a team of students - not professionals - playing a game while representing their, and my, school. I donate to the program, buy season tickets, and live and die with the guys and coaches on Saturdays, but my interest would dissipate if the games became professional contests between hired athletes. I have not watched a pro football game in years - since the Michael Vick affair - and have not missed the NFL one iota. Were college athletes to be paid, the only way I'd stay with NU is if it opted to go to a lower division of true amateurism. Nobody cares what I might do, I am sure, but I would hate to lose this part of my life.

 

[willycat]

If collegiate student-athletes are ever paid, college athletics has lost one fan forever. I know many friends who feel the same way. I love the tailgates with frat brothers from 40 years ago, the pageantry of the stadium, and the thrills of the game. However, all of that depends on a team of students - not professionals - playing a game while representing their, and my, school. I donate to the program, buy season tickets, and live and die with the guys and coaches on Saturdays, but my interest would dissipate if the games became professional contests between hired athletes. I have not watched a pro football game in years - since the Michael Vick affair - and have not missed the NFL one iota. Were college athletes to be paid, the only way I'd stay with NU is if it opted to go to a lower division of true amateurism. Nobody cares what I might do, I am sure, but I would hate to lose this part of my life.

Your last sentence says it all. Pay them!

 

[hdhntr1]

I have to totally agree. Also I know that Nu doesn't release salaries and doesn't have to as a private institution but wonder where they stand in the conference pecking order on pay toward assistants. Seem to remember that Barnett tried to make a point of raising assistants pay when he was here.

All our HCs have had to work hard on getting the administration to raise assistants pay. In the past our assistants pay has been among the lowest in the highest cost of living area. Hopefully we have gotten to the point that we are beyond that

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

If collegiate student-athletes are ever paid, college athletics has lost one fan forever. I know many friends who feel the same way. I love the tailgates with frat brothers from 40 years ago, the pageantry of the stadium, and the thrills of the game. However, all of that depends on a team of students - not professionals - playing a game while representing their, and my, school. I donate to the program, buy season tickets, and live and die with the guys and coaches on Saturdays, but my interest would dissipate if the games became professional contests between hired athletes. I have not watched a pro football game in years - since the Michael Vick affair - and have not missed the NFL one iota. Were college athletes to be paid, the only way I'd stay with NU is if it opted to go to a lower division of true amateurism. Nobody cares what I might do, I am sure, but I would hate to lose this part of my life.

Why? No one is suggesting thousands of dollars from what I see. Just a small stipend as if they had a part time job at a school. I am sure you are aware of the restrictions placed on athletes regarding employment. Honestly, some of the jobs I have seen through the college work program are comical. My favorite, was the kid at Marquette who worked the evaluator in one of the dorms. He literally pushed the up arrow ( the only one there was) for us when touring a dorm.

The money involved already makes this a profession. It’s just the schools, coaches and few others getting the fat checks.

 

[NUCat320]

I didn't catch your initial POV, @Aging Booster. Are you in favor of increasing assistant salaries, or against, or just acknowledging that it's a fact of life?

Certainly, I would hope that $700k for a strength and conditioning coach would indicate to you that this is something other than amateurism. If amateurism is what you seek, then the bird has flown on that decades ago, and you've been duped. There is nothing pure about college football. It's big business.

 

[Katatonic]

If collegiate student-athletes are ever paid, college athletics has lost one fan forever. I know many friends who feel the same way. I love the tailgates with frat brothers from 40 years ago, the pageantry of the stadium, and the thrills of the game. However, all of that depends on a team of students - not professionals - playing a game while representing their, and my, school. I donate to the program, buy season tickets, and live and die with the guys and coaches on Saturdays, but my interest would dissipate if the games became professional contests between hired athletes. I have not watched a pro football game in years - since the Michael Vick affair - and have not missed the NFL one iota. Were college athletes to be paid, the only way I'd stay with NU is if it opted to go to a lower division of true amateurism. Nobody cares what I might do, I am sure, but I would hate to lose this part of my life.

Sorry to break it to you AB, but the players are already (pseudo) professionals - they just aren't compensated nearly as well as they should be.

The very fact that the labor is so cheap is what allows the traditional powers (or schools that want to be seen as a traditional power such as TAMU) to pay its HC $6, $7 or even $8 mil/yr.

HC's at the top programs in each of the P5 conferences make more than the typical NFL coach despite only coaching amateurs.

And it's not just the HC's and their staffs that have gotten fat off the largess, but AD's (remember when $150k was a lot of $$ for an AD?).

Athletes for the revenue sports not only pay for the ever increasing salaries for coaches and administrators, they also subsidize the schollies for the non-revenue sports.

The college athletic financial system is basically like socialism.

Actually, make that totalitarian communism - where the workers get the scraps and the apparatchik live the high life getting most of the benefits.

And doubt many are saying that players should be compensated in the tens of thousands (even if they are worth that or more - see the corruption in BB recruiting), but a larger stipend than what many schools/conferences have proposed seems reasonable.

Such a stipend would not only cover living expenses during the school year (including cost of travel to go back home), but as a supplement/substitute for the time demads which prevent them from holding a part-time job during the school year or a summer job.

Regarding the latter, it's difficult for FB players to find summer employment (unless boosters are involved) since their summers are cut short as they have to report to camp (which is basically their real summer job).

I suppose athletes for the non-revenue sports will also be getting stipends, but really, they are the ones who should be happy that the players on the revenue sports are subsidizing their scholarships, if not their entire program.

Another thing which really won't have to do w/ the schools is allowing athletes to get compensated for their likeness when it comes to video games or other such opportunities.

Would even allow athletes to get compensated for signing autographs, but would put a limit (say $5k over the course of an athletes' college career, with a $2k cap within a school year) in order to prevent abuses.

Such things may be a benefit when it comes to recruiting for the traditional powerhouse programs, but they basically already had those advantages anyway.

Used to think that athletes needn't be compensated more than w/ a schollie and R&B (and that was while living w/ guys on the team), but as things have changed in college sports, that's an outdated and frankly, a naive view.

Playing FB or BB is basically a job for athletes.

The whole notion from the NCAA that the student part of student-athlete comes first is a joke.

They increased the FB regular season from 10 games to 11 and now 12; and w/ conference championships and the play-off, there are teams that play nearly an NFL schedule.

Things are just as bad, if not worse when it comes to BB.

Teams that end up going to championship game basically miss a month of classes (they may get about 2 days out of each week to go to class).

And then you have the 1-and-done who basically have a foot out of the door the moment they step on campus; just doing enough to keep themselves eligible (often w/ the help of the school) and then for the 2nd semester blow off school, if not withdrawing altogether.

Why? No one is suggesting thousands of dollars from what I see. Just a small stipend as if they had a part time job at a school. I am sure you are aware of the restrictions placed on athletes regarding employment. Honestly, some of the jobs I have seen through the college work program are comical. My favorite, was the kid at Marquette who worked the evaluator in one of the dorms. He literally pushed the up arrow ( the only one there was) for us when touring a dorm.

The money involved already makes this a profession. It’s just the schools, coaches and few others getting the fat checks.

Yep, and as stated, FB players don't have time for part time jobs during the school year, much less get a summer job (w/o booster help) as they have to report to their real summer job in late July/August.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Sorry to break it to you AB, but the players are already (pseudo) professionals - they just aren't compensated nearly as well as they should be.

The very fact that the labor is so cheap is what allows the traditional powers (or schools that want to be seen as a traditional power such as TAMU) to pay its HC $6, $7 or even $8 mil/yr.

HC's at the top programs in each of the P5 conferences make more than the typical NFL coach despite only coaching amateurs.

And it's not just the HC's and their staffs that have gotten fat off the largess, but AD's (remember when $150k was a lot of $$ for an AD?).

Athletes for the revenue sports not only pay for the ever increasing salaries for coaches and administrators, they also subsidize the schollies for the non-revenue sports.

The college athletic financial system is basically like socialism.

Actually, make that totalitarian communism - where the workers get the scraps and the apparatchik live the high life getting most of the benefits.

And doubt many are saying that players should be compensated in the tens of thousands (even if they are worth that or more - see the corruption in BB recruiting), but a larger stipend than what many schools/conferences have proposed seems reasonable.

Such a stipend would not only cover living expenses during the school year (including cost of travel to go back home), but as a supplement/substitute for the time demads which prevent them from holding a part-time job during the school year or a summer job.

Regarding the latter, it's difficult for FB players to find summer employment (unless boosters are involved) since their summers are cut short as they have to report to camp (which is basically their real summer job).

I suppose athletes for the non-revenue sports will also be getting stipends, but really, they are the ones who should be happy that the players on the revenue sports are subsidizing their scholarships, if not their entire program.

Another thing which really won't have to do w/ the schools is allowing athletes to get compensated for their likeness when it comes to video games or other such opportunities.

Would even allow athletes to get compensated for signing autographs, but would put a limit (say $5k over the course of an athletes' college career, with a $2k cap within a school year) in order to prevent abuses.

Such things may be a benefit when it comes to recruiting for the traditional powerhouse programs, but they basically already had those advantages anyway.

Used to think that athletes needn't be compensated more than w/ a schollie and R&B (and that was while living w/ guys on the team), but as things have changed in college sports, that's an outdated and frankly, a naive view.

Playing FB or BB is basically a job for athletes.

The whole notion from the NCAA that the student part of student-athlete comes first is a joke.

They increased the FB regular season from 10 games to 11 and now 12; and w/ conference championships and the play-off, there are teams that play nearly an NFL schedule.

Things are just as bad, if not worse when it comes to BB.

Teams that end up going to championship game basically miss a month of classes (they may get about 2 days out of each week to go to class).

And then you have the 1-and-done who basically have a foot out of the door the moment they step on campus; just doing enough to keep themselves eligible (often w/ the help of the school) and then for the 2nd semester blow off school, if not withdrawing altogether.




Yep, and as stated, FB players don't have time for part time jobs during the school year, much less get a summer job (w/o booster help) as they have to report to their real summer job in late July/August.

I never really understood the uproar for paying the revenue Sports some type of reasonable stipend to account for pretty much everything they aren’t allowed to do by NCAA rules. I was a non revenue athlete many moons ago and can tell you we were supported by income generated by revenue sports. I can also tell you that some of those athletes in the revenue sports come from extremely rough backgrounds and many didn’t have money to go get a pizza or ware clothes many of us took for granted.

Yet the schools they represent pay coaches and others millions as they gleefully rake in the cash from TV contracts that start games at 9:00 at night or clearly cater towards the cash cow versus the student component of NCAA’s “student athlete” mantra.

It’s all tilted against the athlete by both the NCAA and the pro leagues. Why would Pro leagues want a change? It is basically a free Minor league system for them. The NCAA and this schools collect and collect off of TV, merchandise and attendance. Baseball and Hockey are the only major sports that have a real option to go pro out of High School. It would sure be interesting if someone could make a go at developing a true minor league football program that allows NFL teams to sign draft picks right out of HS and develop them. Of course, it won’t happen because it only benefits the athlete .

 

[pawildcat]

Sorry to break it to you AB, but the players are already (pseudo) professionals - they just aren't compensated nearly as well as they should be.

The very fact that the labor is so cheap is what allows the traditional powers (or schools that want to be seen as a traditional power such as TAMU) to pay its HC $6, $7 or even $8 mil/yr.

HC's at the top programs in each of the P5 conferences make more than the typical NFL coach despite only coaching amateurs.

And it's not just the HC's and their staffs that have gotten fat off the largess, but AD's (remember when $150k was a lot of $$ for an AD?).

Athletes for the revenue sports not only pay for the ever increasing salaries for coaches and administrators, they also subsidize the schollies for the non-revenue sports.

The college athletic financial system is basically like socialism.

Actually, make that totalitarian communism - where the workers get the scraps and the apparatchik live the high life getting most of the benefits.

And doubt many are saying that players should be compensated in the tens of thousands (even if they are worth that or more - see the corruption in BB recruiting), but a larger stipend than what many schools/conferences have proposed seems reasonable.

Such a stipend would not only cover living expenses during the school year (including cost of travel to go back home), but as a supplement/substitute for the time demads which prevent them from holding a part-time job during the school year or a summer job.

Regarding the latter, it's difficult for FB players to find summer employment (unless boosters are involved) since their summers are cut short as they have to report to camp (which is basically their real summer job).

I suppose athletes for the non-revenue sports will also be getting stipends, but really, they are the ones who should be happy that the players on the revenue sports are subsidizing their scholarships, if not their entire program.

Another thing which really won't have to do w/ the schools is allowing athletes to get compensated for their likeness when it comes to video games or other such opportunities.

Would even allow athletes to get compensated for signing autographs, but would put a limit (say $5k over the course of an athletes' college career, with a $2k cap within a school year) in order to prevent abuses.

Such things may be a benefit when it comes to recruiting for the traditional powerhouse programs, but they basically already had those advantages anyway.

Used to think that athletes needn't be compensated more than w/ a schollie and R&B (and that was while living w/ guys on the team), but as things have changed in college sports, that's an outdated and frankly, a naive view.

Playing FB or BB is basically a job for athletes.

The whole notion from the NCAA that the student part of student-athlete comes first is a joke.

They increased the FB regular season from 10 games to 11 and now 12; and w/ conference championships and the play-off, there are teams that play nearly an NFL schedule.

Things are just as bad, if not worse when it comes to BB.

Teams that end up going to championship game basically miss a month of classes (they may get about 2 days out of each week to go to class).

And then you have the 1-and-done who basically have a foot out of the door the moment they step on campus; just doing enough to keep themselves eligible (often w/ the help of the school) and then for the 2nd semester blow off school, if not withdrawing altogether.




Yep, and as stated, FB players don't have time for part time jobs during the school year, much less get a summer job (w/o booster help) as they have to report to their real summer job in late July/August.

Judging by your definitions in this post, I take it you feel we're living under totalitarian communism at the moment.

 

[kaTNap]

Given our track record of assistant coach retention & our ability to hire up-and-comers like Coach Ayeni, I think it's reasonable to think we're paying our staff competitively. If we saw assistants regularly leaving for lateral career moves, there would be grounds for concern, but that hasn't happened in a while. A good LB coach leaving to be a DC is what's supposed to happen.

 

[hdhntr1]

I never really understood the uproar for paying the revenue Sports some type of reasonable stipend to account for pretty much everything they aren’t allowed to do by NCAA rules. I was a non revenue athlete many moons ago and can tell you we were supported by income generated by revenue sports. I can also tell you that some of those athletes in the revenue sports come from extremely rough backgrounds and many didn’t have money to go get a pizza or ware clothes many of us took for granted.

Yet the schools they represent pay coaches and others millions as they gleefully rake in the cash from TV contracts that start games at 9:00 at night or clearly cater towards the cash cow versus the student component of NCAA’s “student athlete” mantra.

It’s all tilted against the athlete by both the NCAA and the pro leagues. Why would Pro leagues want a change? It is basically a free Minor league system for them. The NCAA and this schools collect and collect off of TV, merchandise and attendance. Baseball and Hockey are the only major sports that have a real option to go pro out of High School. It would sure be interesting if someone could make a go at developing a true minor league football program that allows NFL teams to sign draft picks right out of HS and develop them. Of course, it won’t happen because it only benefits the athlete .

I would say fine so long as different teams are not allowed to pay differing amounts.

 

[hdhntr1]

Given our track record of assistant coach retention & our ability to hire up-and-comers like Coach Ayeni, I think it's reasonable to think we're paying our staff competitively. If we saw assistants regularly leaving for lateral career moves, there would be grounds for concern, but that hasn't happened in a while. A good LB coach leaving to be a DC is what's supposed to happen.

We did before but not so much lately.

 

[Katatonic]

It’s all tilted against the athlete by both the NCAA and the pro leagues. Why would Pro leagues want a change? It is basically a free Minor league system for them. The NCAA and this schools collect and collect off of TV, merchandise and attendance. Baseball and Hockey are the only major sports that have a real option to go pro out of High School. It would sure be interesting if someone could make a go at developing a true minor league football program that allows NFL teams to sign draft picks right out of HS and develop them. Of course, it won’t happen because it only benefits the athlete .

LeBron is a huge fan of dOSU, but he said something along the lines that if he had played in college, he would have made millions for the coach rather than making millions for himself (aside from making the owner of the NBA franchise he played for wealthier).

Judging by your definitions in this post, I take it you feel we're living under totalitarian communism at the moment.

Well, we are getting closer to the PRC which is basically a totalitarian fascist state nowadays (close ties btwn industry and govt.) where the media is to be controlled, anyone who doesn't like or criticizes the leader is deemed a traitor and rampant uber-nationalism (you know, the artificial kind of nationalism) and xenophobia is fostered.

Hence the term Chinazi coming into usage.

 

[Sheffielder]

I never really understood the uproar for paying the revenue Sports some type of reasonable stipend to account for pretty much everything they aren’t allowed to do by NCAA rules. I was a non revenue athlete many moons ago and can tell you we were supported by income generated by revenue sports. I can also tell you that some of those athletes in the revenue sports come from extremely rough backgrounds and many didn’t have money to go get a pizza or ware clothes many of us took for granted.

Yet the schools they represent pay coaches and others millions as they gleefully rake in the cash from TV contracts that start games at 9:00 at night or clearly cater towards the cash cow versus the student component of NCAA’s “student athlete” mantra.

It’s all tilted against the athlete by both the NCAA and the pro leagues. Why would Pro leagues want a change? It is basically a free Minor league system for them. The NCAA and this schools collect and collect off of TV, merchandise and attendance. Baseball and Hockey are the only major sports that have a real option to go pro out of High School. It would sure be interesting if someone could make a go at developing a true minor league football program that allows NFL teams to sign draft picks right out of HS and develop them. Of course, it won’t happen because it only benefits the athlete .

I have always advocated for players getting a stipend that bridges the gap between their scholarships and the university's official Cost of Attendance. For those unfamiliar, COA is a figure published by each school that includes tuition, room and board (based on dorm and meal plan rates), books, fees, and (this is the important part) "reasonable living expenses" for any full-time student at the school.

As I understand it (anyone please correct me if I am wrong), under the current NCAA system, student athletes get everything but "reasonable living expenses." This is a problem because many student athletes don't come from a family that can just write them a $500 check every month. This is also where middle/upper class people confuse the value of a scholarship/free tuition - of course it's valuable, but it doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student, especially since athletes in season cannot hold a job. This literally means that a hungry football player who gets back from Iowa City on a bus at 2 a.m. may not be able to afford a pizza, and can't technically accept a free pizza from his roommate because it's a meal from a booster who didn't know him prior to his playing career.

The beauty of linking player stipends to the university's COA number is that it keeps the system honest about paying players. It ensure that Alabama isn't paying players $50,000 while Northwestern pays them $1,800. It also accounts for regional cost of living adjustments. It costs less to live in Fayetteville, Arkansas than it does in Evanston (...or so I would imagine).

Here's the problem - most people ignore COA when the conversation about paying players come up. Most talking heads and sports journalists talk about flat amounts like $5,000 per player or whatever, but they are totally disregarding a system that's already in place and would be relatively easy to implement. And frankly, student athletes DESERVE THIS. If not as athletes, then simply as STUDENTS. Financial Aid is awarded to the general student population based on the COA number. Ironically, in this respect, student athletes actually get penalized for being student athletes.

 

[willycat]

I have always advocated for players getting a stipend that bridges the gap between their scholarships and the university's official Cost of Attendance. For those unfamiliar, COA is a figure published by each school that includes tuition, room and board (based on dorm and meal plan rates), books, fees, and (this is the important part) "reasonable living expenses" for any full-time student at the school.

As I understand it (anyone please correct me if I am wrong), under the current NCAA system, student athletes get everything but "reasonable living expenses." This is a problem because many student athletes don't come from a family that can just write them a $500 check every month. This is also where middle/upper class people confuse the value of a scholarship/free tuition - of course it's valuable, but it doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student, especially since athletes in season cannot hold a job. This literally means that a hungry football player who gets back from Iowa City on a bus at 2 a.m. may not be able to afford a pizza, and can't technically accept a free pizza from his roommate because it's a meal from a booster who didn't know him prior to his playing career.

The beauty of linking player stipends to the university's COA number is that it keeps the system honest about paying players. It ensure that Alabama isn't paying players $50,000 while Northwestern pays them $1,800. It also accounts for regional cost of living adjustments. It costs less to live in Fayetteville, Arkansas than it does in Evanston (...or so I would imagine).

Here's the problem - most people ignore COA when the conversation about paying players come up. Most talking heads and sports journalists talk about flat amounts like $5,000 per player or whatever, but they are totally disregarding a system that's already in place and would be relatively easy to implement. And frankly, student athletes DESERVE THIS. If not as athletes, then simply as STUDENTS. Financial Aid is awarded to the general student population based on the COA number. Ironically, in this respect, student athletes actually get penalized for being student athletes.

Most of what you said is true and informative but why not just pay the players/employees a "living wage". The NCAA or whoever is in control could set minimums/maximums possibly using the COA figures. One of these years the players are going to organize shock the programs when bowl season comes around. Either we get a cut of the receipts or no bowl games will be played using unpaid employees.

 

[Sheffielder]

Most of what you said is true and informative but why not just pay the players/employees a "living wage". The NCAA or whoever is in control could set minimums/maximums possibly using the COA figures. One of these years the players are going to organize shock the programs when bowl season comes around. Either we get a cut of the receipts or no bowl games will be played using unpaid employees.

My answer to this, whether popular or not, is that these are AMATEUR STUDENTS who should not be paid a wage for playing a sport that, in many cases, gets them access to an institution where they would otherwise not be given the time of day. It honestly does not matter to me how much revenue sports do or do not generate.

Of course, if it were up to me, APR requirements would be much higher and schools would be disqualified from participating in NCAA activities when they don't meet said requirements. I am fine with athletes "only" getting a free education in exchange for their "work" on the field, but in striking that agreement, I feel that schools owe it to the student athletes to force them to "play school" and do more than just keep them eligible.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Which Big Ten schools pay football assistants the most? Ohio State Buckeyes, then who?
Northwestern is NOT included for obvious reasons...still interesting to see what others are doing.
The results may be surprising to some...for example Wisky is second to last (just ahead of Rukkie)...Indy and Illy are mid-packish, while Minny and IOA are near the top, (AHEAD OF UNL!).
Check it out:
http://www.cleveland.com/expo/erry-2018/03/f1ac39fff4/big_ten_schools_ranked_by_what.html

 

[willycat]

My answer to this, whether popular or not, is that these are AMATEUR STUDENTS who should not be paid a wage for playing a sport that, in many cases, gets them access to an institution where they would otherwise not be given the time of day. It honestly does not matter to me how much revenue sports do or do not generate.

Of course, if it were up to me, APR requirements would be much higher and schools would be disqualified from participating in NCAA activities when they don't meet said requirements. I am fine with athletes "only" getting a free education in exchange for their "work" on the field, but in striking that agreement, I feel that schools owe it to the student athletes to force them to "play school" and do more than just keep them eligible.

Sounds like your fine with programs that make millions off the backs of their so called " student atlethe" who get very little in return. You do realize that coaches and administrators make millions a year while the players play for a 50,000 to $100,00 four year schlorship. Amateur students thing is a shame perpetrated by the NCAA and the member universities. Wish I could fine a column written quite awhile ago by Rick Tellander , which essentially said that the cost of athletic schlorship is way over blown. he mentioned that the buildings that the players use for housing and school are already there and have been paid for years ago. Also that the professors or grad teachers are contracted by the school to teach whether it's 20 students in a class or the class has 5 or 6 additional football or basketball players in it. Yes, the school provides the players with books, food and few dollars for laundry and such. But no way do those things amount a $100,00 + four year schlorship. Yes there is the cost of maintaining the stadiums, which also have been there for quite awhile and transportation to games and of course coaches salaries. let's not forget that the schools make quite a bit of money on ticket sales, concessions, parking and of course "donations" that allow one to witness the games. Oh and let's not forget the enormous amount of money that the receive from radio and especially TV rights. One thing I will say is that the coaches salaries are way over the top, while the kids that play ,get injured and spend countless hours practicing and conditioning, so these coaches and administrators get those salaries and they get some books, a room in a dorm, some meals and maybe a degree.

 

[Sheffielder]

I stand by my original statement. I agree with you that most institutions are taking unfair advantage of student athletes, but I believe that lies primarily in a fundamental disregard for ensuring their persistence and progressive ability to earn a meaningful college degree. This is what every college owes its student athletes, regardless of the division, regardless of the sport, and regardless of whether 10 people or 10 millions people are watching the games. Focusing the conversation on paying players makes it okay for everyone to ignore how so many colleges are failing to honor their fundamental academic obligations.

EDIT: For what it's worth, I would also advocate for ensuring scholarships to complete a degree are available in perpetuity for student athletes if for whatever reason they don't earn a degree within their eligibility. I would also advocate for lifetime healthcare reasonably related to football injuries.

If paying players ever prevails, they should not have any academic requirements at all, including enrollment - just let the athletes wear the uniforms and treat the school logo as a brand - maybe offer free classes as a fringe benefit. Root for your brand, just like people root for the jerseys and the logos on Sundays. Whatever.

 

[hdhntr1]

Obviously paying high salaries to coaches does not guarantee wins, but I do feel that winning coaches pay for themselves. I have absolutely no sympathy for any Big Ten school, including NU, that says they can't spare an extra $4 million or so for football or basketball coaches. We call them revenue sports for a reason, and this is a wealthy conference by any reasonable standard.

An extra $4 million to get to $5 mill or an extra $4 million to get to the $7 mill that OSU pays? Regardless how you figure, NU comes out of general revenues (raising tuitition?) to pay all athletic department costs (got to remember title 9 is part of the costs) while OSU generates a surplus.

 

[hdhntr1]

I am NOT trying to make a point here, just reporting...
"The Buckeyes have upped the ante in assistant coach compensation this offseason, bumping their staff compensation to more than $7 million according to a report by USA Today's stellar sports contract reporter, Steve Berkowitz. That makes Urban Meyer's assistants the highest-paid staff in college football. How does it compare to your favorite team? Assuming you're a Maryland fan, it's more than twice what the Terps spent on assistants ($3.195 million). Two Buckeyes assistants will make more than $1 million, according to Berkowitz's data, and four will make more than $800,000.

None of DJ Durkin's assistants made more last season than the $650,000 paid to defensive coordinator Andy Buh, the 59th-highest paid assistant in the country. The next-highest was offensive coordinator Walt Bell, who ranked No. 103 at $500,000 before leaving for the same job at Florida State. Next-highest: defensive line coach Jimmy Brumbaugh and wide receivers coach Chris Beatty, who tied for No. 181 with $400,ooo salaries. Beatty was promoted to associate head coach this offseason; no contract details have been released yet for Beatty or any of Durkin's new hires, including new offensive coordinator Matt Canada.

Many of the programs spending more on staffing also have more money to spend. Maryland's ticket, concessions and merchandising revenues pale in comparison to Big Ten bluebloods like Ohio State and Michigan, and the school is also three years away from receiving a full conference revenue share. And Maryland ranked No. 32 nationally last year in assistant coach salary -- a spendy-looking investment considering the team's 4-8 record, although the team was hobbled by some major injuries. Four of those coaches -- Bell, Pete Lembo, Tyler Bowen and Anthony Tucker -- have left the program this offseason.

It's unknown how much Durkin's hires have been limited by any budgetary constraints -- Canada will be paid $700,000 by LSU next season, so he likely came at a below-market price. But one thing is certain: Ohio State just escalated the going rate for top coaching and recruiting talent."

The result is OSU has a lot of HCs serving as assistants

 

[hdhntr1]

Sorry to break it to you AB, but the players are already (pseudo) professionals - they just aren't compensated nearly as well as they should be.

The very fact that the labor is so cheap is what allows the traditional powers (or schools that want to be seen as a traditional power such as TAMU) to pay its HC $6, $7 or even $8 mil/yr.

HC's at the top programs in each of the P5 conferences make more than the typical NFL coach despite only coaching amateurs.

And it's not just the HC's and their staffs that have gotten fat off the largess, but AD's (remember when $150k was a lot of $$ for an AD?).

Athletes for the revenue sports not only pay for the ever increasing salaries for coaches and administrators, they also subsidize the schollies for the non-revenue sports.

The college athletic financial system is basically like socialism.

Actually, make that totalitarian communism - where the workers get the scraps and the apparatchik live the high life getting most of the benefits.

And doubt many are saying that players should be compensated in the tens of thousands (even if they are worth that or more - see the corruption in BB recruiting), but a larger stipend than what many schools/conferences have proposed seems reasonable.

Such a stipend would not only cover living expenses during the school year (including cost of travel to go back home), but as a supplement/substitute for the time demads which prevent them from holding a part-time job during the school year or a summer job.

Regarding the latter, it's difficult for FB players to find summer employment (unless boosters are involved) since their summers are cut short as they have to report to camp (which is basically their real summer job).

I suppose athletes for the non-revenue sports will also be getting stipends, but really, they are the ones who should be happy that the players on the revenue sports are subsidizing their scholarships, if not their entire program.

Another thing which really won't have to do w/ the schools is allowing athletes to get compensated for their likeness when it comes to video games or other such opportunities.

Would even allow athletes to get compensated for signing autographs, but would put a limit (say $5k over the course of an athletes' college career, with a $2k cap within a school year) in order to prevent abuses.

Such things may be a benefit when it comes to recruiting for the traditional powerhouse programs, but they basically already had those advantages anyway.

Used to think that athletes needn't be compensated more than w/ a schollie and R&B (and that was while living w/ guys on the team), but as things have changed in college sports, that's an outdated and frankly, a naive view.

Playing FB or BB is basically a job for athletes.

The whole notion from the NCAA that the student part of student-athlete comes first is a joke.

They increased the FB regular season from 10 games to 11 and now 12; and w/ conference championships and the play-off, there are teams that play nearly an NFL schedule.

Things are just as bad, if not worse when it comes to BB.

Teams that end up going to championship game basically miss a month of classes (they may get about 2 days out of each week to go to class).

And then you have the 1-and-done who basically have a foot out of the door the moment they step on campus; just doing enough to keep themselves eligible (often w/ the help of the school) and then for the 2nd semester blow off school, if not withdrawing altogether.




Yep, and as stated, FB players don't have time for part time jobs during the school year, much less get a summer job (w/o booster help) as they have to report to their real summer job in late July/August.

At the same time, they have less need for the summer or part time job as their schooling is already paid for. In the case of NU the total is something like $75-100k per year after taxes. Even at a state school such as IL, the "[ay is something like $40k or so again after taxes. I don't have a problem with a stipend but it has to be limited and cannot vary by school or athlete. Maybe paid by conference or NCAA.