<p>@Roger_Dooley, Is your list of football programs just for FBS schools, because I know many of the FCS schools have high graduation rates?</p>
<p>There are full and partial scholarships. Ones that cover only books. Equivalency or headcount scholarships.</p>
<p>I know a local girl that got a 1% scholarship for her sport. I doubt it will even cover her books for one semester. She will be working at her sport a minimum of 20 hours a week, plus classes and travel. Her coach may also require community service and mandatory study hours/tutoring. </p>
<p>She won’t be able to hold down a part time job to get a little extra spending money, because her sport will take up all her time outside of class.</p>
<p>Fortunately my kid got more in her scholarship package…but it still may not be adequate for our family budget and we may have to assume a mountain of loans to help her. Even as a recruited athlete.</p>
<p>Those non-revenue generating sports will never get the same kind of recognition that the big time football and basketball ones get. However, it’s likely that these kids who won’t go pro, will get their degrees. </p>
<p>Honestly, the added plus of being a recruited athlete sounds amazing and awesome, but having seen this firsthand with one of my kids, this process is a nail-biting one. </p>
<p>Not only do we not know the exact amount of financial aid she will receive in spring (her school doesn’t do early fin aid offers, even if admitted early), but also she would have probably gotten into the university, and many others, based on her grades. It’s great to get an early offer of admission. She gets to play the sport she loves and study what she wants to study. </p>
<p>You never know if the coach is playing you, telling several people in the same position that they want you, having you come on recruit trips. You may not know how you stand until practically the deadline for the signing period. It’s definitely not a cake walk. </p>
<p>I can definitely see having students get some sort of spending money. Even recruited athletes would love to have a pizza or go out to a movie, once in a while, during college. </p>
<p>Not every parent can send their kid spending money, especially if breaking the bank for travel to school/home several times a year, computer, books, etc. It adds up.</p>
<p>I don’t even understand the point of a 1% scholarship. Was it the kids dream school? If she was recruited did she have other options? We had a kid from our high school go to a school in ND because he got a teeny tiny offer (a joke really in the big picture when you have to pay out of state tuition) and the coach ended up leaving before he even got their. Is it so important to say I was “wanted” by showing of money that kids are taking offers that are so low just to say they were recruited? I just don’t really understand the above unless it was her dream school… sorry to question, just curious… thanks</p>
<p>It’s a totally reasonable question. This coach is known for giving out tiny scholarships to lots of girls. If they get them to sign, they can “prove themselves.” Generally, they get more money each year, if they perform. </p>
<p>If they don’t prove themselves, they tend to leave the team or sit the bench, forever. However, if these talented kids don’t go to the competing school, this in theory helps the coach win games. </p>
<p>It’s quite a good school, and kids are clamoring to go there. Still, knowing what we know about the coach and how he works, you know your chances of playing there aren’t great, even if signed.</p>
<p>Also - this girl didn’t do a good job of playing the recruited athlete role. She started way late to the process and had other significant issues that prevented her from being seen by more coaches/schools.</p>
<p>Why do so many people watch NCAA football (rugby with pads) when NFL has better talent?</p>
<p>It is a complicated topic. I voted “Paychecks aren’t the answer, but major reform is needed”. </p>
<p>The current power structure is controlled by the NCAA (who doesn’t give a rip about Johnny and Sally college student) and the Athletic Directors and Coaches at the big revenue schools. The power needs to go back to the college presidents (as it currently is in the Ivys) for decisions on athletics as it relates to academics. For those schools not willing to do that, they should be put in a college professional league where the athlete-students or just plain athletes are compensated fairly. Way, way too much money and power is in the hands of the NCAA & Atheltic Directors. No one is going to have the student or student-athletes interests at heart unless this power structure changes. Colleges will have to find ways & make some hard decisions to fund previoius non-revenue sports.</p>
<p>People watch college football because NCAA football has a real sense of loyalty to your program and school you went to instead of some contrived crap based on where you live.</p>
<p>Look at what’s happening with UC Davis and University of Maryland. Lots of non-revenue generating programs are either on the chopping block now, or have been/will be, when only revenue generating sports are the focus of the Chancellor/President.</p>
<p>The students at UC Davis have one objective - to have a balanced scholar/athlete academic climate at their school and believe that Chancellor is screwing it up.</p>
<p>7 or 8 sports are being cut at U Maryland…unless those teams and boosters can come up with the money on their own, largely due to the cost of football, primarily. </p>
<p>You need football to pay for everything else. But do those coaches need to make the kind of money that they do, especially when their teams aren’t performing? Do these teams need to carry more than 100 football players to be competitive?</p>
<p>So the general opinion is NCAA football > NFL football in popularity because of school pride. So the NCAA football athletes should play for their love and loyalty to their school. That’s how it happens in the rest of the world. </p>
<p>You love your college—>you love your sport—>you love playing that sport for your college—>added advantage:you become popular and get hot chicks. </p>
<p>Where does money get in all this? Also playing sports in college is recreational. Why do they spend 40+ hours on it every week? I mean the main aim of a college is an education and a degree, right? Just like the main aim of NFL is football.</p>
<p>^ I agree with this.</p>
<p>College football and basketball athletes are getting quite a lot for playing a sport. They not only get a college education, but they get into colleges and universities that they wouldn’t be able to sniff if it wasn’t for football. They’re playing the game they love in front of their school; I’d say that’s awesome. IMO, unless it is professionals, athletes should not be making a significant paycheck.</p>
<p>@Knight2007 Lol, you think just anyone can join swim, cross country, and track? Let’s see you swim like a shark or run 3 miles in 14:30 or less. This ain’t high school bro.</p>
<p>I voted for scholarship. If they ,want to make money, they can go pro</p>
<p>@Karan- you really think sports at the D1 level is recreational?? Ha ha, clearly you must not have an understanding of the level of these athletes in any sport and the commitment it takes to be competitive. And I agree with you @endphase, what on earth was the comment from Knight about… lol… Please… its almost funny… </p>
<p>Sure there are recreational aka “intramural” sports for college students to have a good time with, but this section is for athletes (and parents trying to help those athletes) who are serious and committed and have worked extremely hard to get where they are at in whatever sport they might be pursuing… </p>
<p>I can tell you having 2 athletes (one is D1 and plans to go pro after college and another who plays NAIA and has no plans to go pro) it is a HUGE HUGE HUGE commitment at either level. Please don’t try to call it recreational or say “anyone” can do it, because I guarantee you, you are completely incorrect. </p>
<p>Here is a link from the NCAA website showing what percentage of high school athletes go on to compete at the collegiate level in a small selection of sports. I believe the total % when you add in all sports at the college level is less than 4%… not too many…
[Estimated</a> Probability of Competing in Athletics Beyond the High School Interscholastic Level - NCAA.org](<a href=“http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/issues/recruiting/probability+of+going+pro]Estimated”>http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/issues/recruiting/probability+of+going+pro)</p>
<p>Add in a % of players who receive $$ for their talent and it drops much lower than that…</p>
<p>It’s a lot harder to play a sport at a level to “get an edge on admissions” than it is to be admitted to that school, Ivy League included! More importantly, these athletes have to work more than full-time to play D1 sports at their school, a lot more time than being a waiter or clerk on 10 hour days. If it’s really easy to get into colleges as an athlete, wouldn’t you make your kids become athletes? A lot of parents tried, but their didn’t put enough effort or did not have the talent to get into good schools. Playing sports like football and basketball aren’t just about being big or tall, the amount of effort these kids put in to their sports. The problem is, yes, it’s hard to play track and field at Oregon, but it’s a lot harder to play basketball at Kentucky, and the amount of money the coaches get compared to how much the players get in scholarships in college versus the pros? No wonder a lot of NBA/NFL players don’t graduate college. That’s a problem because that’s less human capital in our economy.</p>
<p>^ Word. 10char</p>
<p>As it stands, athletes have plenty of incentive to attend and compete with just scholarships, as it could lead to a professional career, and if it doesn’t, at least they’re getting a degree for a reduced (or free) cost. In that sense, they are getting their fair share of the deal. On the other hand, they are highly prized and thus produce money. Still, if the only benefits they get are scholarship aid and other perks (like dedicated advisers), it better ties them to the mission of higher education, not sports. In other words, they’re students, not hired professionals.</p>
<p>You could also view this in terms of “elasticity of demand.” Because college stands in the way of these athletes’ professional careers, their demand is relatively inelastic, and so the college has no incentive to pay them in cash.</p>
<p>On top of that, revenue-producing sports support the rest of the sports programs that are always in the red (yet still provide value to the community and the population at large). I think the system works as it is.</p>
<p>@momof2010: I didn’t mean to call D1 sports recreational. I know they are tough and competitive. I meant to say why is there even a D1 level for college students? Why are college students required to play at such a cut throat level? They entered college to get an education, and play a sport alongside for fun. If that ‘fun’ activity becomes ‘work’ as in D1, it’s useless for college students. But my point is moot because D1 exists and will keep existing.
I agree that your son has a huge commitment. But I want to ask why does he play that particular sport? He loves to play, that’s why. Why does he go to college? To hone his going-pro skills at D1 level and get a good education. So college provides him all that and his degree serves as a back-up option if he fails to make it big? So why does he need money right now?</p>
<p>Sorry Karan, I see what you are saying. My son is in a non revenue sport and in this sport men tend to peak later in life at it, so playing D1 is the best training ground currently for US players as this country does not have a sport only training facility as they do in other countries. I voted NO on the players being paid above and beyond what they get for athletic aid. My son happens to be one of the lucky ones who is on a full ride so he is getting his education for free… His “job” is to perform well at his sport and with that job comes the many hours of work but on the positive note he loves his sport so it is a win win… The degree he gets will be the bonus as you say. I do not feel that he or any other athlete should be given money above and beyond a full athletic scholarship in any sport. They have plenty of other perks as well, first choice of classes, tutors if needed, free equipment, travel, uniforms, etc… I have no complaints at all, very happy with how it is going. His team will be off to a week in Hawaii upcoming. How can anyone complain about that?? Sure can’t here!!! :)</p>
<p>^Cool Cool, so we agree. Btw which sport is it?</p>
<p>^ golf (most missed class time too of any ncaa sport, brutal for the academics)</p>