Skip to content

Kentucky Sports Radio

University of Kentucky Basketball, Football, and Recruiting news brought to you in the most ridiculous manner possible.

Pay For Play Debate Continues

This week at the SEC meetings the SEC coaches came together and issued a proposal to athletic directors that would pay football and men’s basketball players an additional $4,000 in scholarship money per year. The idea would be to return some of the revenue that the big two sports are generating to the players. Which seems to make sense. Most of these players will be going pro in something other than sports all while putting their bodies on the line day in and day out. Not to mention the impossibility of working a part-time job and attending school while being a student athlete.

Yet the NCAA stands against a stipend. Just last year they shut down a 2,000 dollar stipend to go to all student athletes. All that while posting record revenues all over college sports. The 4,000 dollar scholarship is one that the SEC could easily afford. Yesterday they announced that all 14 schools would be receiving  a record 20.7 million dollars this year. A number which could be increased by as much 17 million annually once the SEC network launches in  2015. With such a ridiculous amount of money being generated by athletes there is no solid reason why these guys shouldn’t be paid.

On one hand it may not be fair to the smaller conferences and schools that aren’t pulling in the dollars of an Alabama or Kentucky. But on the other if these schools have the money then why not allow it to go to the people that are generating it instead of coaches, administrators, and back to the school. One day these guys are going to be paid might as well get a jump start on the future now.

 

Article written by Andrew Cassady

Follow me @ACassady_KSR

18 Comments for Pay For Play Debate Continues



  1. catfan4444
    7:12 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    Oh, they’re getting paid…..somehow, somewhere. This would just make it official



  2. jd
    7:28 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    UK has 472 student-athletes (294 men and 178 women). A stipend of $4,000 per year each runs nearly $1.9 million. I can see UK and SEC schools affording this but not schools in other conferences. How can NCAA make this decision and “keep the playing field level?”



  3. fla_ashley
    7:43 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    You leave out costs when you only talk about the revenues distributed to schools. Sure, 20 million was distributed to each SEC school. But look at the numbers that were on this same site a week or two ago. UK brought in close to 80 million total across sports last year, but spent all but 3 million of that on the cost side. They were one of the most profitable schools, too. Sure, with the SEC network bringing in more money, assuming costs stay the same, they will have a lot more profit in the near future. But you have to look at both sides. 3 million profit for one of the nation’s most profitable sports programs. Now, how many scholarship athletes are there? At UK? How about at all D-1 schools, many of whom are actually in the red?



  4. fla_ashley
    7:50 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink


  5. UKDMD
    8:02 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    3 makes a good point.

    Many also forget that these players are already gettig paid. They get housing, food, and training from some of the top coaches in the country. Not to mention nutritionists, dietitians, doctors for injuries, an tutoring. If you were to put a price on all of that, its pretty astronomical after 4 years.

    Now, is the way the NCAA runs things right? Absolutely not. They’re not student athletes. They’re athlete students. The concept of student athletes at the D1 level is a joke. We are moving to a point where these players will likely begin getting paid, but only when each conference and school can afford the same amount and we can all agree on a proper amount. Otherwise it won’t remain fair as 3 put it.

    Until then, don’t feel too bad for these players. They’re getting a really good deal as it is. Stoops brother over in Oklahoma feels the same way I do when he was asked recently about payment for athletes.



  6. Chaz
    8:03 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    @2 – the NCAA can’t “keep the playing field level”, that organization has proven that time and time again. What the NCAA has done is to perfect a way to cash in on the blood, sweat and tears of college athletes. If the NCAA is serious about the student-athlete maybe they could divide the royalties from media outlets that use their logo among the D3 and D2 schools that can’t afford a stipend. The D1 universities which could provide a stipend are threatened with the Death Penalty for helping an athlete or his/her family while those same schools are praised for reaching out to a non-athlete. Somewhere, I’ve missed out on something.



  7. fla_ashley
    8:14 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    actually I just ran the numbers for profitability for 2012 for 230 D-1 schools. The average profit for each school was $1,038,929. As #2 states, 4k for each student athlete would cost almost 1.9 million, meaning with this stipend, the average school would lose 900,000 per year. No wonder the NCAA is not for this. If we assume all schools have 472 student athletes, like UK does, the average school would break even by giving a stipend of $2200 per athlete.

    Btw, the most profitable school last year was Texas A&M at almost 38 million profit. No wonder they were asked to join the SEC. UK came in at #17 with a profit of $3,443,633. There are 5 SEC schools in the top 10, 2 Big Ten schools, and 3 from the Big 12.



  8. Dumbppl
    9:07 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    For all you morons who can’t read good, it says that only the men’s basketball and football players would be getting paid



  9. Rod Tidwell
    10:03 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    Show me the money! of course players should be paid. And I don’t see any reason why thy should all be paid the same. Better players should get more…..duh.



  10. Ky_Tom
    10:41 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    @Fla_Ashley…The biggest reason the SEC lags in money made, one simple reason…Alcoholic beverages ARE NOT being sold at SEC games. This is one of the reasons why UofL was rated the best fan support school that was put out just last week.and UK was 7th …UofL sells lot of it, at every game, and every sport….The selling of beer has hurt in some ways, but the bigger SEC schools can make it up in ticket sales for football and basketball..Texas A&M has been used to selling alcohol and make that extra money, but in joining the SEC, the By-Laws states NO ALCOHOL…Both Missouri and Texas A&M will lose money when the newer numbers come out,,,,



  11. The courts
    10:43 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    Well #8, it does say football and men’s basketball but the US legal system already declared Title IX as the rule regarding benefits equality so good luck getting around that one to give special incentives to 98 particular athletes on campus.

    IMO if your sport is non-rev it should operate on a shoestring budget anyway. Football makes the money, football should reap the rewards before anyone else gets a taste.



  12. lonnieb
    11:37 pm June 1, 2013 Permalink

    it sucks that football and basketball have to pay for the wager polo team……that’s what kills he revenue brought in. The 2 main sports pay all the bills for the athletic program. I read in The courier journal here in louisville and i think the school losses like 50k for the women’s Louisville team to play a game at Yum center. title ix is such a joke…..only in sports do they try to govern equality. If women’s programs don’t make any money they should.not get the same benefits



  13. Sport fan
    12:04 am June 2, 2013 Permalink

    This is so funny, this being a UK sports website and you viewers can’t help but to talk or mention Louisville Cardinals. Lol lol and it’s just not this blog it was like 7 or 8 out of 10 I read. I don’t have to say anything on that, it speaks for it self. #Jealous



  14. dB
    3:24 am June 2, 2013 Permalink

    Put their bodies on the line day in and day out…hahahahahahahahahaha when did playing sports and living the life of a D1 athlete equate to being a soldier in a war zone? What a joke. How about not having to pay double the price of tuition over 20 years like everyone else, getting to live a dream, and shutting up. What a joke.



  15. harold
    6:56 am June 2, 2013 Permalink

    They are getting free schooling. I paid for my time in college. I am opposed to this totally.



  16. sdfsdfsdf
    10:14 am June 2, 2013 Permalink

    I just now could not go away completely your website previous to suggesting that we really cherished the most common information any person supply in your company? Will likely be all over again frequently to be able to inspect new articles



  17. Bunny
    4:14 pm June 2, 2013 Permalink

    Leave this can of worms unopened. These athletes get a free education and innumerable network opportunities not available to other college students. There’s no way to pay them more than they already get without creating many, many more problems. Leave it alone!



  18. UKfaninVA
    6:49 pm June 2, 2013 Permalink

    I don’t like it when people pretend the student-athletes generate ALL of this money. The real value is in the University brand. If these guys and girls took all their talents and played organized games outside of the NCAA system, let’s see how many people would care/pay to see it etc. We pay for UK basketball because it is UK basketball….the kids playing, who I have a lot respect for, don’t bring as much value as the name on the front.