If I were running the NFL, I'd be pushing HARD for the NCAA to pay athletes.

[Apparition]

And I'm honestly amazed that they're not already doing so, given the fact that the sport is experiencing a health crisis. The tiny percentage of college players who actually get to play in the NFL, let alone make real money doing it, is going to mean fewer and fewer kids making the decision to play at the high school and college levels without being paid. This will eventually start draining the NFL's talent pool, which the league absolutely cannot afford given that a lot of fans are already complaining about the quality of play. This is going to be a very real problem for the league in the not-too-distant future so why aren't the owners trying to head it off now by pressuring the NCAA?

[youngosu]

If the NFL decided to pressure the NCAA why would the NCAA listen?

As a college football fan I fully support players being allowed to get sponsorships while in college and am fine with scholarships that pay the true cost of attendance but if players want to be paid specifically for playing football they need to turn professional. If the NFL wants these kids getting paid that is up to them, not the NCAA. 

My preference would be for football to develop a system like every other sport has or is developing where players can choose to go pro at 18, having colleges paying athletes directly isn't really an option because of potential lawsuits from athletes in non-revenue sports. If a college decides to pay its football players its gonna have to pay athletes in every sport which would actually end up hurting athletes in the long run because far less colleges would provide such opportunities. 

[Apparition]

15 minutes ago, youngosu said:

If the NFL decided to pressure the NCAA why would the NCAA listen?

Because this is a problem that will affect the NCAA's bottom line as well. 

As a college football fan I fully support players being allowed to get sponsorships while in college and am fine with scholarships that pay the true cost of attendance but if players want to be paid specifically for playing football they need to turn professional. If the NFL wants these kids getting paid that is up to them, not the NCAA. 

With the NFL's rules regarding eligibility being what they currently are, what incentive is there for a player who isn't entering the college level as a top recruit to subject his body and mind to 3+ years of abuse that will potentially have major negative consequences on his long-term health if he's not being paid for it? That's the question I think a lot of kids and their parents are asking themselves and it's one that should absolutely terrify the NFL because so much top NFL talent did not come out as top college talent and vice-versa.

[Eagles23]

If colleges paid players how do they decide how much players get paid? Would there be a salary cap? Do the depth guys that don't play in games still get paid? How much would a starting running back get vs a QB?

[Huelon]

31 minutes ago, Starless said:

And I'm honestly amazed that they're not already doing so, given the fact that the sport is experiencing a health crisis. The tiny percentage of college players who actually get to play in the NFL, let alone make real money doing it, is going to mean fewer and fewer kids making the decision to play at the high school and college levels without being paid. This will eventually start draining the NFL's talent pool, which the league absolutely cannot afford given that a lot of fans are already complaining about the quality of play. This is going to be a very real problem for the league in the not-too-distant future so why aren't the owners trying to head it off now by pressuring the NCAA?

 

There will always be plenty of football players.  There will never be a shortage of talented athletes who would rather play football than get a real job.

I'm totally against paying college kids to play any sport.  First off how much and who gets paid, noway ya can pay 100 players, so what happens to the those not making $$$$$, yep..resentment. What happens when a starter who is getting paid loses his job, he loses his $$$$$?

We have had college football for a long long time, without anyone being paid (ah....yes I know). Look at the success it has been as is.

 

The NFL has no worries, they aren't in any danger.

[iknowcool]

6 minutes ago, Eagles23 said:

If colleges paid players how do they decide how much players get paid? Would there be a salary cap? Do the depth guys that don't play in games still get paid? How much would a starting running back get vs a QB?

I always figured each could take a % of what the football program makes and split it equally among the players.  You could use the numbers from the last 5 years to decide the next 5 years or something along those lines.  For example, a quick Google search says Bama made around $46 million last year.  If you only pulled 5% of that into the pool, it would be around 27K each player (assuming Alabama had the full 85 man roster).  

I'm not super knowledgeable about the situation so I don't know how feasible that is, but it would be one route they could take.  

[Apparition]

 

8 minutes ago, Eagles23 said:

If colleges paid players how do they decide how much players get paid? Would there be a salary cap? Do the depth guys that don't play in games still get paid? How much would a starting running back get vs a QB?

At a minimum, they should be paid based on how much time they actually spend on the field. Obviously you don't pay a kicker/punter as much as you do the starting QB or LT. But I firmly believe pay should be linked to how much wear and tear a player is putting on his body. 
I also like the idea of giving each player an insurance policy that pays out a certain amount if he doesn't get drafted by a certain point. 

The point is that the NCAA's labor system (which is, let's face it, basically slavery with extra perks) coupled with what we know now about the long-term physical effects of playing football disincentives a lot of kids from playing if we look at the situation rationally. And yes, that will ultimately become a problem for the NFL. There's already data indicating a sharp rise in the percentage of parents who won't let high-school age kids play football. And that's only going to keep rising.

[DontTazeMeBro]

39 minutes ago, Starless said:

With the NFL's rules regarding eligibility being what they currently are, what incentive is there for a player who isn't entering the college level as a top recruit to subject his body and mind to 3+ years of abuse that will potentially have major negative consequences on his long-term health if he's not being paid for it? 

Because it’s fun. Most high school football players know high school is it for them. And they still do it because it’s fun. And also because of the chicks

If you don’t enjoy football there’s a very slim chance you were going to play it professionally 

Another point. We’re talking about teenage boys. No one pays them to eat laundry detergent or ride down hills in shopping carts but they still do it

[TENINCH]

Me too just so I could have NCAA Football back

[Apparition]

14 minutes ago, DontTazeMeBro said:

Because it’s fun. Most high school football players know high school is it for them. And they still do it because it’s fun. And also because of the chicks

If you don’t enjoy football there’s a very slim chance you were going to play it professionally 

Another point. We’re talking about teenage boys. No one pays them to eat laundry detergent or ride down hills in shopping carts but they still do it

Which would be fine if they made the decision to play in a bubble, but they don't. We're talking about an organized team sport that requires a huge time commitment and skills that need to be developed before the player reaches adulthood (yes, I know there are exceptions but those are few and far between). Parents may not find out about all the stupid things teenage boys do for fun, but I somehow doubt it's possible to keep them out of the loop if you're playing high school football.

[cddolphin]

36 minutes ago, Eagles23 said:

If colleges paid players how do they decide how much players get paid? Would there be a salary cap? Do the depth guys that don't play in games still get paid? How much would a starting running back get vs a QB?

Sort by conference, determine advertising revenue for each conference's media deals, determine a % of that revenue that would be required to go to players. On every team, each player who accrues a season is guaranteed a certain minimum amount, with any increase based solely on snap count (not position).

[11sanchez11]

1 hour ago, Starless said:

Because this is a problem that will affect the NCAA's bottom line as well. 

 

Quote

wouldn't paying players have a bigger affect on their bottom line?

[Apparition]

Just now, 11sanchez11 said:

wouldn't paying players have a bigger affect on their bottom line?

Not if the talent pool is significantly diminished.

[DontTazeMeBro]

If you’re good enough at football to go to college for free and then good enough to to make at least $400k out of college you MIGHT have some health problems down the road. Plus the benefits of participating in team sports. I don’t think this is that tough of a decision 

[11sanchez11]

1 minute ago, Starless said:

Not if the talent pool is significantly diminished.

You think a couple thousands of dollars is going to have a great influence on the way people feel about football? I personally don't. The prize would still be the NFL money. Which is there whether NCAA pays or not.