Goodbye NCAA Football

Thought you might be interested, I've got wind of the NCAA Clearing Board/House(I think that's their name,) is setting new educational guidelines for athletes. To be eligible, you had to graduate with a 2.0 GPA. Starting with the class of 2016, it will be a 2.3, and before a student-athlete's senior year, they will need a 2.3 or greater to be eligible to play their freshman year. Senior year can't be a 'catch-up' year for them now.

The statistics, if it went in effect this year, 30% of the football players and 40(or 45 I can't remember)% of basketball players would have been ineligible this year(their freshman year.)

Not really super important to this topic, but the NCAA does seem to be stressing grades now more than ever.

Mike E has the NCAA come and seen your school yet to discuss this? My buddy is an assistant AD in North Carolina and they had a NCAA representative come see them this week.

Not yet. I have a feeling that schools will find ways to get that number down to 5-10% if worse comes to worse.

with super conferences and a playoff system the NCAA may become a none factor soon enough anyway.

athletes will never be paid anyway. No school can afford to give money to all the title 9 girls sports that no one goes to see and therefore generate no income

I am starting to think the unionization attempts and NCAPA will ultimately cause the NCAA to change much of their rules regarding college athletes, specifically basketball and football players. Full cost of attendance scholarships is probably the first issue that will happen. This alone (in other terms a stipend) will allow college athletes the same benefits to cover college expenses, such as travel and food, that ordinary students already can receive.

If NCAA is smart they will strike a deal with the schools and allow the NCAPA to negotiate (not the union though as a union would have to have the NCAA acknowledge the players work for their respective schools, which I am not certain they want to do, but could be for their benefit, so who knows) a flat compensation for a players likeness in the game. The compensation would go on top of the scholarship and would be controlled through the NCAA or the school. By doing this the NCAA can invest the money and release it after making a percentage yield while also getting profits from their likeness being used within the game as well.

It ain't perfect, but life isn't perfect. It is better than what we have though.

I think all of this worry over player likenesses is a bit silly.

My .02, they could (should) make a college FB game where the rosters were randomized. For example, they could take the relative rankings for the last 5 years and build an engine that would randomize the rosters within a range based on those rankings. Additionally, schools could have reputations like tailback U or linebacker U that would give them a roster boost at those spots. Player numbers, sizes, and ethnicities could be similarly randomized to ensure that any similarities to real life players were unintentional. They could release a random roster set monthly for online play to further bring home the fact that player likeness isn't intended. Having the ability to use modified rosters in any online play could be removed to ensure that fans didnt use "real rosters" online. Less focus on "realistic" rosters year after year would allow the dev team to focus on other things or just save time and money.......

I'd buy the shit out of that game. You would still get the "feel" of powerhouse teams and cupcakes. Honestly, the way I play the game (online and offline dynasties) I could care less if Johnny Football is the QB at TAMU or whatever, the initial players are gone soon enough anyways.

Also, on the topic of paying CFB players..... at the big time schools that could afford to pay players, the life of a scholarship player (facilities / living quarters / meal plans etc) is good enough that they wouldn't "need" the money. At the small schools where players really could use the money (see the game boycott at Grambling last season) the schools flat out cant afford to pay the players. The percentage of schools that are making a fortune on athletics is pretty small. Additionally, any state school isn't exactly fleecing their pockets with profit, that money all gets reinvested into the school for other athletics programs/facilities or for academics facilities.

As I've said more than once, if scholarship athletes are being taken advantage of...... please, please, please take advantage of my kids to Stanford, or Notre Dame, or hell, even Eastern Washington!

To anyone who hasn't seen it yet, I would recommend watching 'Schooled: The Price of College Sports' on Netflix. Gives great insight into this issue from a players perspective. They even go as far as calling NCAA "student athletes", a term strategically created by former NCAA president Walter Byers, indentured servants. The definition of indentured servant is a people who sign a contract to work for food and/or lodging without the benefit of getting paid. The ONLY people who this 1700-1800 year term applies to in the present day is the NCAA "student athlete". The kids should be getting SOME piece of the NCAA pie, whether it's a game check or by simply allowing them to make money off of endorsements. This film was very informative as to how big of a crook the NCAA really has become. Byers himself, the guy who created NCAA scholarships for "student athletes", has even gone on record a few years back as saying that college athletes should and will get paid sometime in the near future. So to say that "student athletes" will never get paid and should never get paid in some fashion, is ridiculous to me.

Most Universities cost $20,000 plus per year in tuition for the average student. The average student also has to pay for their own food and lodging, which we'll call another 5-10k per year. So, scholarship athletes get a 25k or more per year value for playing a game part time. Of course they complain, everyone complains about their job.

Regardless, I'm reasonably sure there are plenty of people who wont agree and wont change their mind, but as I've said, I know a handful of people who were D1 athletes in college and they all say they were more or less living the good life. None of these guys were star players so maybe that's why they weren't whining about it. My wife and I both have tens of thousands of dollars in student debt plus we both had to work while attending college. A scholarship athlete who chooses to take advantage of the opportunity can graduate college with zero debt while making meaningful and useful connections through boosters and such. They are being given every advantage and yet, like much of our society today, they bitch and whine as if they are being punished.

It's a debate that could go back and forth, and there are arguements to both sides. I would just urge anyone who has interest on the subject, and who has some free time, to watch the documentary.

Well said Wym and something tells me that for many of these kids would have less of a chance at getting a college education if they did not have full rides.

You dont think that being drafted and making millions of dollars is them taking advantage of being stars? He can get paid to sign as many autographs as he wants once he is ready to go pro. In school, all those guys get treated very fairly, the idea that the stars think they deserve more is laughable since they do in fact get more since they will have opportunities at the next level that most guys will never get.

Also, if they feel that strongly that they need to be paid right away they could go join the Arena league of CFL for 3 years out of high school and then go to the NFL.... Of course I'm sure you'd agree that those options wouldnt prepare them for the NFL the same way that major CFB does..... which is exactly my point, they get a high value of education plus training for the next level.

I can live with that.