Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! Pot, meet kettle. Now turn around R E A L slow and look into this mirror.:rofl: :thumb:
Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! It has nothing to do with the way it may have been used back then....it is a take off on how you people talk..thats all.:thumb:
Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! Now that you mention this... I was doing a little research today about the monies owed to the University since the probation window is being closed on Feb. 1st. For the last 5 years, bowl revenue has been held by the SEC from UA. As soon as the University leaves that probation window, the University will receive (and I didn't pull the exact figures, just rough estimations from the last 5 years) 50% of that money, plus interest. I loosely estimate that to be a lump sum between 23 and 28 million. I've made the comment that the University can afford it, and you can see how and why. The neat thing is...even though the University's Ath. Dept. has been operating without the bowl revenue, we've still be making money. Last fiscal year was a bit over 6 MM, profit. Understand, a portion of that money will be retained by that Ath. Dept., a good portion of it going to the Education side of the University.
Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! Why attack the messenger...Makes you seem small.:lol: :geauxtige :cry:
Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! I have thought for while - why, with all the money that Alabama has in its athletic department - why the hell do they not hire a decent coach. Now Alabama has a good coach. I buy that Alabama can win more with Nick Saban as its coach. I also buy that Saban does not have everything going for him at Alabama that he had at LSU. Bama fan probably disagrees with this. The thing that gets really stuck in my craw is not necissarily the money that is paid to a head coach, but the difference between what is paid a head coach and the value received by the "student athlete." Doing some simple math, the LSU football program brings in probably about $5,000,000 per home game. TV revenue brings in a good bit, too. Merchandising, etc... I do not know what the football program brings in, but I'd guess it is north of $60MM per year - and they don't have to pay the players! So to pay a coach $4 million when you don't need to pay a dime to the guys who actually play the game, that equation makes sense. I guess the only question is how much is too much? If Saban wins for Bama, then I suppose the answer is that they got a bargain. There is something morally offensive about that. It may be the way things are in major college sports, but that does not make it right. If you place a value on exposure you get from laying big-time SEC football and a value on a college degree - say of $100K for the degree and $100K for the exposure, there is a $1.25 million diff between Miles and player. Do the math on Saban. That is just crazy. With more and more money being thrown at coaches (LSU not excluded, cuz I sure Miles will be in the stratosphere before long) - the value differential will need to be addressed sooner than later. All that being said - it has been fantastic serving large helpings of humility to BAMA fan for the past 4 years. They, however, refuse to take a bite. Under Saban, beating Bama will be all the sweeter.
Re: Chadd lets the bammers have it! You bring up a good point, and it is well thought out. The only extra benefits I see for the players falls into these categories. More revenue means better facilities. Now, I'm not only talking about Ath. facilities, right now I'm talking about the Academic Center set up by the University. It's one that has been viewed, studied, and is beginning to be copied across the NCAA. (just as a small example, it was one the first things Spurrier demanded at USC). Secondly, it's a domino effect. By that, I mean with Saban the football program revenue is probably going increase by at least 25%. In turn, that will be passed to the other programs (Title IX as example) who could use more money in their budget. FWIW, I think the stipend for athletes right now is $1500 bucks a month. That's one of the reasons you see a group of players living together...cutting expenses, still able to "live a life," so to speak. I've been an advocate of a better financial situation for college athletes for a long time...and as soon as I'm on board, the first thing that comes to mind are those schools that operate in the red, year in and year out. Frankly, there isn't anything the NCAA can do to legislate compensation right now. They tried twice with basketball coaches, it ended up in Federal Court, and they lost both times. Again, great post!!!
