Originally posted by Joecool:
I think that is a byproduct of being the son of an ex NFL player. Ed knows the league maximizes players but does not give the same back in return. College especially. They make so much money off these meaningless bowl games and refuse to do a true playoff.
Probably beginning of the end as players begin to act more like corporate america and be selfish trying to maximize their money as the game ends up taking the hit.
Agree with you partly.
Football programs themselves may make money, but as a whole most athletic programs are not profitable (except the top 4-5 programs). But the main reason they aren't profitable is the skyrocketing salaries of coaches. And if you don't pay the coaches, your school sucks and players wont go there because they wont get to the NFL with sub-par coaching and development.
But when there are 75+ players on a team, they are already getting paid $20-60k in benefits, there isn't that much money to go around. Its like the EA lawsuit over NCAA football game, sure EA took advantage of players by not paying them, but there is only like what $100-$300 per player to go around?
If the NCAA paid players, you'd either have to cut coaches salaries in half or cut non-money making sports.
Personally I think more of a stipend is totally neccessary for the players.
Which brings me back to your statement, even if McCafferey is getting paid $10k to play in the bowl game, its still the better business decision to sit it out. The NCAA/STanford paying McCafferey more benefits wouldn't change the business side of the decision.
[ Edited by SunDevilNiner79 on Dec 19, 2016 at 12:01 PM ]