Mailbag June 29: Would Neutral Games Be In Package, Thoughts On Paying Players?

By On June 29, 2012 · 4 Comments

Q: I have two questions for you. I’ll start with the easier one. If UConn does decide to play games a “home” game at Metlife Stadium or somewhere else in New York, will those tickets be included in the season tickets or will they be extra. My next question deals with the stipend for players. Mack Brown said recently that he was hoping the new playoff system will renew the push for stipends for the players. These kids get their education for free as opposed to an average Joe like me who’s up to their ears in student loan debt. So I think that a scholarship is more than enough of a reward for these kids, especially with the sky rocketing price of tuition at schools across the country. Just wondering what your take is on the whole stipend thing.

A: I wouldn’t know the answer to the first question, certainly not today. On question two? Yes. There’s too much money being made and schools and coaches are making a lot more money than they used to and its a lot more than the cost of a college education. I have to say the argument that their education is paid for and they don’t need extra is an argument people not in those athletes’ shoes love to make but theres a lot of money being made off their performances. They should get a little extra for it – in my opinion.

Tagged with: •
 
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Reddit Facebook Twitter Delicious

4 Responses to Mailbag June 29: Would Neutral Games Be In Package, Thoughts On Paying Players?

  1. Artie A... says:
    July 8, 2012 at 3:21 pm

    For 95% of the schools it would be fiscally impossible.
    Remember title $. If you are going to pay the football team you have to pay every other sport.
    Anyone doing the math will quickly come to the answer.
    Lets not forget the follow up demand by those on academic scholarships. The debating team is not to be forgotten.

  2. fustrated smart fan says:
    July 3, 2012 at 8:03 pm

    Uconn will make so much money during the regular season so that ‘money losing bowl games’ will not be relavant or matter because they are going to expand the RENT and fill it because they will have the top players in america because Uconn and the Big East teams now have the best scholarships which the NCAA fought ferociously under the radar and lost by TWO votes. These new scholarships are like insurance against being cut if you are hurt and players will keep their scholarships if they can no longer play, i think. Is there any better education incentive? The bowl committee does not make decisions for ” the goodness of mankind ( players )”. MONEY ONLY.

  3. Mike Falko says:
    July 2, 2012 at 7:26 am

    Paying players does seem like an advantage to the traditional powers, however I hope there would be restrictions on stipends so that pay is consistent across the board. These kids work their butts off for a team that not only makes millions of dollars, but subsidizes pretty much every other team at their school. I may have more student debt than I like, BUT I also had time to work one or two part time jobs throughout my time at Uconn. Being a division 1 football player IS a full-time job, on top of school. The kids deserve a share of the revenue.

  4. JoeP says:
    June 30, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Hi Des, I respectively disagree on your view that college players be paid. That will be just another way for big football powers like Texas to offer more money than other universities can which then leads to schools like Texas, Ohio State, LSU, etc. outbidding others to always get the best players. A free boat for four years education should be enough.