|
Replies: 34
| visibility 2307
|
All-TigerNet [6067]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Lets post numbers
2
May 25, 2024, 9:02 PM
|
|
I am thinking that the college football payment schedule blew up about ten years ago with the start of mega salaries for coaches. I don’t feel that athletes with their free rides got a bad deal prior to 2014. The only coach that Clemson has had to make mega money is Dabo. Does anyone have numbers to talk about this from a mathematical perspective?
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [6070]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Bigger than a breadbasket***
1
May 25, 2024, 9:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2889]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
867-5309
3
May 25, 2024, 11:46 PM
|
|
^^ there's a number for ya ^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [716]
TigerPulse: 90%
22
|
Re: 867-5309
1
May 26, 2024, 7:19 AM
|
|
Thanks for the laugh …
Jenny, Jenny
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Sports Icon [57400]
TigerPulse: 100%
59
|
Re: BR-549
5
5
May 25, 2024, 11:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5099]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: Lets post numbers
2
May 26, 2024, 8:20 AM
|
|
I 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
I have some.
1
May 26, 2024, 8:37 AM
|
|
Clemson football brought in 76.9 million dollars in 2023.
Divide that by 85 scholarships and you get
904,700 per athlete, per year. Multiply that by four years, and each football player averages bringing around $3.6 million to the university.
Scholarship value is a max of $145,000, per the sources I can find. So, football athletes get a return of around 1/25 of the value they bring in.
That means that the University gets the value for a mere 4% in athlete labor costs.
Private businesses generally pay 20% to 35% of their gross sales in labor costs.
4% is uber cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [136]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
Dont forget to factor in all the expenses and other employees***
May 26, 2024, 9:49 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Re: Dont forget to factor in all the expenses and other employees***
1
May 26, 2024, 9:55 AM
|
|
This is about revenue, not expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15510]
TigerPulse: 100%
50
|
Re: Dont forget to factor in all the expenses and other employees***
2
May 26, 2024, 11:02 AM
|
|
At some point you have to pay for those expenses that gets you revenue. 20% revenue (sharing) is in line with many major corporations and allows some profit after expenses. If a business doesn't have enough profit to grow, they become stagnant and ultimately fail or are taken over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
That doesn't matter
1
May 26, 2024, 1:19 PM
|
|
Expenses affect the entire program.
The disparity between what the university makes, what the coaches make, and what a relative pittance the athletes schollys are worth is the issue.
Again, fair market value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15510]
TigerPulse: 100%
50
|
Re: I have some.
May 26, 2024, 10:56 AM
[ in reply to I have some. ] |
|
What is the percentage after you subtract out all other sports costs that football revenue sponsors? You do know that every sport loses money with the exception of Men's basketball (some years).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
I don't know, but it doesn't matter.
1
May 26, 2024, 1:22 PM
|
|
That's just another expense that hits the entire football program.
When the guts that do the work and that we pay to watch are inky getting 4% of the profits, that's a disparity incongruent with fair market value
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [37256]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 10373
Joined: 2015
|
Re: I don't know, but it doesn't matter.
May 26, 2024, 1:37 PM
|
|
It does matter without football there are no other sports. They bring in little to no money. Guess what traveling other non revenue sports is not free. With the current inflation and now having to travel to Cali it’s not getting any cheaper.
Fail to understand the fair market value when it comes to amateurs. Mark it down it will fail. Not if but when. Which players or teams do not play due to salary. Sorry folks Clemson will not be suiting up this week over a salary discrepancy with the school. OL does not think they are making fair market value. It’s a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Easy. The "amateur" model is illegal under federal law.
May 26, 2024, 3:27 PM
|
|
So says the concurring opinion in the NCAA vs Alston case. That's the case that the NCAA lost 9-0.
"Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate."
SCOTUS Justice Kavanaugh
That is EXACTLY what the NCAA definition of "amateur" is. Federally illegal. The NCAA hit away with it for far too long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
What other sports football subsidized also doesn't matter
May 26, 2024, 3:29 PM
[ in reply to Re: I don't know, but it doesn't matter. ] |
|
The bottom line is that the football team creates the demand and the revenue.
Giving that revenue to everyone except the people that produce that revenue is illegal, despicable, and sppalling.
Again, it's great that the courts are stopping that exploitation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7902]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: What other sports football subsidized also doesn't matter
May 26, 2024, 3:37 PM
|
|
You're obviously not a fan of college sports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Non Sequitur
May 26, 2024, 5:57 PM
|
|
I am a Clemson alum that is not a fan of exploitation.
Nor am I a fan of lawbreaking.
The amount of blaming the athletes for decades of NCAA lawbreaking and exploitation here is appalling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [37256]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 10373
Joined: 2015
|
Re: I have some.
1
May 26, 2024, 1:40 PM
[ in reply to I have some. ] |
|
Fairly certain they receive more than school money
and there are far more than 85 scholarship athletes at Clemson. Food and travel alone for all athletes has to be staggering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
More than school money isn't a factor
May 26, 2024, 3:22 PM
|
|
in the value that football athletes bring to the school. NIL money is not school revenue.
And again, costs aren't the issue here.
It's a revenue distribution issue, fair market value factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29549]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
So you're saying players should get profit sharing on top
May 26, 2024, 3:51 PM
|
|
of their agreed upon salary.
You're comparing college athletics to businesses. Businesses (U.S. anyway) pay their workers a salary that they agree to or not and move on. College athletes accept their "salary" when they sign the letter of intent. They are not forced to "work" under the conditions they accept.
Businesses are not required to pay profit sharing, but some do. And profit includes revenue and expenses.
"Revenue is the money a business earns by selling a product or service, and profit is the money your business keeps after accounting for all the expenses involved in generating that revenue.
https://www.mosaic.tech/financial-metrics/revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
There agreed in salary is currently zero dollars.
May 26, 2024, 6:01 PM
|
|
If you don't believe that college sports are a business, I refer you to the concurring opinion in NCAA vs Alston that states that NCAA',s sports business model is illegal.
Claiming that college spurts that make millions of dollars every year from business transactions is somehow not a business is ludicrous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29549]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
I'm not disagreeing they are a business
May 26, 2024, 6:17 PM
|
|
So if they are a business, they can operate like one as a whole. Football, men's basketball, and maybe baseball are the only college sports that generate a profit. And with Title 9 (the law), there has to be a women's team for every men's team. So football, men's basketball, and maybe baseball are supporting all the men's and women's non-profitable sports and they all have expenses.
So are you saying this new legislation is treating each sport as a seperate business even though they are just a part of the athletic department and the university? And the legislation is only concerned about the revenue and not the profit? Businesses can't survive long term without profit, unless it's a government subsidized business like the post office.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Not so. There aren't womens' football teams******
May 26, 2024, 8:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Where to begin...
May 26, 2024, 9:42 PM
[ in reply to I'm not disagreeing they are a business ] |
|
There are many business models. You don't get to decide which one any university chooses.
There does not have to be a womens' team for every nebs' team. If so, show me the Lady Voks womens' football team.
I clearly said that the courts have says that the NCAA's spurts model is illegal.
Court rulings aren't legislation. Only a legislative body can pass legislation, so your question on that one is meaningless.
The laws are:
The 1987 Interstate Commerce Act which prevents stares or their agents from interfering with interstate commerce. For example, a NIL deal for an out of state athlete.
The 1990 Sherman Antitrust Act, which prevents illegal monopolies and price fixing.
The TN/VA vs NCAA case injunction that specifically enjoined the NCAA from enforcing their rules against boosters and NIL.
The Ohio vs NCAA injunction that prevents the NCAA from interfering with unlimited transfers without penalty, sitting out, etc.
There are a lot of folks conflating desperate things here. One such is confusing private NIL deals with pay for play. Those are two very different things, legally and in fact.
Another us confusing a scholarship with fair market value for football players. That is clearly but so.
Another is confusing the NCAA with the individual universities. That's just not the case.
Worst if all are the people that think the NCAA is just above the law. Obviously, they are not. They have lost or are losing every case and injunction about their illegal rules.
They are desperate to settle the House and Carter cases for BILLIONS of dollars because they'll likely lose tens of billions if those cases get to a jury.
Reggie Bush got his Heisman Trophy back and is suing for defamation because if what the NCAA did to slander him based on his boosting their rules...which were illegal. USC has fired a separate case based the same issue.
The bottom line is that no one knows exactly what the new system will look like. Each university can choose their own path.
I know they that the Vols will still play football, that Neyland will be loud, and that Tennessee makes record amounts of money on football. 20 million to pay athletes is a drop in that bucket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29549]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
I know we don't have to have women's football
May 26, 2024, 11:12 PM
|
|
Are you doing this on purpose? You have to have the same number of women's sports scholarships as men's sports scholarships. per Title 9. Actually it says it has to be proportional to enrollment, so if a school is 50/50 male/female, the scholarships have to be equal, which is why Clemson has 11 women's teams to 8 men's teams bc of football.
And whatever about scholarships, it's just semantics. You can call it a benefit if you want, like the insurance coverage and other benefits you get at work that the company pays most of. That's money you didn't have to pay and part of your salary package. Did you pay for college - tuition, fees, room, board, books? Was very expensive wasn't it?
So you're a Vol fan? You keep bringing them up, but your avatar is a tiger paw with a 1 in it. Is that just a ruse?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [15510]
TigerPulse: 100%
50
|
Re: Where to begin...
May 26, 2024, 11:17 PM
[ in reply to Where to begin... ] |
|
Well it looks like Clements, the BOT and Neff are going to have to make some tough choices on which sports to drop. I have already heard the SEC Commisioner throw that possibility out as a result of revenue sharing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
Businesses that are illegal monopolies can't enforce illegal contracts.
May 26, 2024, 6:05 PM
[ in reply to So you're saying players should get profit sharing on top ] |
|
That describes the NCAA to a T.
And...you missed the part about the Ohio vs NCAA federal injunction that says that college athletes have the right to transfer whe ever they wish without penalty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29549]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Exactly, the athletes aren't forced to sign their contracts
May 26, 2024, 6:25 PM
|
|
and don't even have to adhere to them since they can transfer out right after spring practice and/or the season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [29549]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Ok
May 26, 2024, 9:19 PM
|
|
We'll forget the $100k or w/e the scholarship is worth, tutoring help not available to the regular student, stipends..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2906]
TigerPulse: 75%
33
|
How is it so difficult to understand...
May 27, 2024, 7:40 AM
|
|
...that benefits are not salary? You can't spend a cent of it.
How difficult is ut to understand that schollys are nowhere near fair market value?
How difficult is it to understand that you are arguing for a system that exploits the athletes?
How difficult is it to understand that you are arguing for a system that the courts have ruled is illegal under federal law?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [6067]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Re: I have some.
May 27, 2024, 7:17 AM
[ in reply to I have some. ] |
|
I have not read any legislation that states that revenue sharing will be done based on gross dollars generated. I have read that payout will have to factors in Title IX. I am expecting rules and structure just like the pro teams where there will be a salary cap amount.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22934]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 13964
Joined: 2013
|
Re: Lets post numbers
May 26, 2024, 6:22 PM
|
|
~JKB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 34
| visibility 2307
|
|
|
50
