Devils Advocate: Would paying players really help keeping top talent in college sports?
Options
Comments
-
greenwood1921 wrote: »greenwood1921 wrote: »"Equal pay for equal work" wouldn't matter in this situation because a female Basketball player would not be a member of the men's basketball team.
That's for corporate America.
Title IX deals mostly with how much funding the government gives to the programs.
The state wouldn't be paying these players -- the school, the NCAA, and the conferences would.
That's like saying Oklahoma would have to pay their women's softball coach just as much as Bob Stoops.
So the football players would be become state employees that are under contract or part time hourly employees. Lets say they are state employees. At that time they will fall under state HR rules and student unions. You think these universities want their athletes under a union.
And if these athletes want to be under a contract they will want to start negotiating for more money. Cause if I am a star player, That backup will not be making more than me. That goes back to student subsidizing the sport programs at these universities.
Nope. Not employees at all. It's a trust fund. Nobody is getting paid while they play.
And again, the "state" is not paying for the fund.
The school (out of sports profits), the NCAA, and the conference.
Or just the NCAA, the conferences, and the Bowl/tournament organizations.
And like I said, the pay tiers will be prenegotiated and based on whether they become starters or based on the playing time they end up getting in their time at the school.
And like the pros and schollys, each school will have a cap on the pay tiers that they can give out.
It ain't as hard to figure out as y'all making it.
Y'all just falling for that Slave-master okey doke that its "too expensive" or too difficult or that it goes against "tradition".
If *anybody* on a college campus is being paid to be there, then please believe that *everybody* can be paid.
Hell all these "red tape" ? arguments could be made about the scholarships themselves.
That's a trade off with monetary value in itself, but somehow putting money in the players pockets at some point is "impossible"?
Funny how the pay questions never come up when players are given thousands of dollars worth of merchandise via gift-bags at bowl games or championship rings worth thousands when they win something.
From a legal and "title 9" standpoint, a lawyer could argue that "every student athlete" at Alabama should get a $10k iced out championship ring and not just the football players.
Foh.
You know the whole EA scandal comes from the NCAA avoiding a trust fund situation. the ED O'Bannon case uses the trust fund idea and the NCAA is losing money to avoid that. It goes back to the quote in the Law review. Billie Jean King wrote, “The real issue is not how much money the plan would cost, but how much control the colleges are willing to give up.” -
6 current football players join suit against NCAA
NEW YORK — Six current college football players were added as plaintiffs Thursday to a high-profile anti-trust lawsuit that claims the NCAA owes billions of dollars to former players for allowing their likenesses to be used without compensation.
The players are: Vanderbilt linebacker Chase Garnham; Clemson cornerback Darius Robinson; linebacker Jake Fischer and kicker Jake Smith from Arizona; and tight end Moses Alipate and wide receiver Victor Keise of Minnesota.
"These athletes are incredibly brave. They are well-aware of the risks of standing up to the NCAA, and yet they felt that this was the right thing to do," Michael Hausfeld, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
Former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon is the lead plaintiff among 16 former college athletes in the long-running legal battle that could fundamentally alter how the NCAA operates. Basketball Hall of Famers Bill Russell and Oscar Robertson previously joined the lawsuit that also names video-game maker EA and the Collegiate Licensing Company.
A federal judge in Oakland, Calif., on July 5 allowed the attorneys to update their lawsuit to fix legal technicalities, including adding at least one active player to the lawsuit.
Garnham and Fischer are the most prominent players among the six new plaintiffs, all of whom are seniors.
Fischer is one of the Pac-12's top linebackers. He led Arizona with 119 tackles last year.
Garnham led Vanderbilt with seven sacks and 12.5 tackles for loss.
Robinson has started six games in each of the last two seasons for the Tigers, though his season was cut short last year by an ankle injury in October.
Smith is a walk-on who missed last season with a knee injury and is competing for a starting job this season.
Alipate has not played at Minnesota in four seasons, including a redshirt year. Keise played 14 games over three seasons for the Gophers.
NCAA spokeswoman Stacey Osburn said the NCAA would reserve comment until it has had time to read the amended complaint filed Thursday.
The judge is still mulling whether to turn the lawsuit into a class action, representing thousands of current and former athletes. Such a ruling would be a significant legal victory for the players, exposing the NCAA and its member schools to billions of dollars in damage. The plaintiffs now demand the NCAA find a way to give players a cut of the billions of dollars earned from live broadcasts and memorabilia sales, along with video games.
The move to add current student-athletes to the suit comes a day after the NCAA announced that it would no longer allow EA to use its name and logo in video games.
Hausfeld called the NCAA's decision to break ties with EA "petty and arrogant"
"It's admission of a practice that goes to the heart of the contention that the NCAA believes it is above the law," he said late Wednesday.
Osburn responded in a statement that the NCAA's business relationship with EA only pertained to the logo and name.
"Student-athletes were never a part of this relationship and plaintiffs' attorneys know it. Further, the $545,000 paid annually to the NCAA for the use of the logo and name goes right back to support student-athletes across all three divisions," she said.
-
just give them the money up front, make them cut the checks for tuition, living expenses, etc...teach them how to manage money, instead of some admins doing all the paperwork, make them do it and let them see where the money goes. If they don't pay their tuition, they don't play. I wish something like this would work without a bunch of scheming and twitter pics of dudes eating sandwhiches with a stack of hundreds in between two slices of bread
-
just give them the money up front, make them cut the checks for tuition, living expenses, etc...teach them how to manage money, instead of some admins doing all the paperwork, make them do it and let them see where the money goes. If they don't pay their tuition, they don't play. I wish something like this would work without a bunch of scheming and twitter pics of dudes eating sandwhiches with a stack of hundreds in between two slices of bread
The athletic dept. know them mfers wouldnt pay their tuition. They would take that money and give some ? excuse. "Man I was hungry and I needed a coat..............................and some jeans with the shoes to match the belt. Got to look good for the media day, right?"
Coaches job security are too fragile to rely on little ? like that. -
just give them the money up front, make them cut the checks for tuition, living expenses, etc...teach them how to manage money, instead of some admins doing all the paperwork, make them do it and let them see where the money goes. If they don't pay their tuition, they don't play. I wish something like this would work without a bunch of scheming and twitter pics of dudes eating sandwhiches with a stack of hundreds in between two slices of bread
The athletic dept. know them mfers wouldnt pay their tuition. They would take that money and give some ? excuse. "Man I was hungry and I needed a coat..............................and some jeans with the shoes to match the belt. Got to look good for the media day, right?"
Coaches job security are too fragile to rely on little ? like that.
oh, no doubt it would be an absolute disaster, filled with corruption, side deals, and cover-ups within the schools.
pretty much how it already is. But i think something along those lines would be good in terms of teaching them how to manage their money responsibly like every other person on this planet and learning the consequences of not doing so. but I admit, it could never work. -
greenwood1921 wrote: »greenwood1921 wrote: »"Equal pay for equal work" wouldn't matter in this situation because a female Basketball player would not be a member of the men's basketball team.
That's for corporate America.
Title IX deals mostly with how much funding the government gives to the programs.
The state wouldn't be paying these players -- the school, the NCAA, and the conferences would.
That's like saying Oklahoma would have to pay their women's softball coach just as much as Bob Stoops.
So the football players would be become state employees that are under contract or part time hourly employees. Lets say they are state employees. At that time they will fall under state HR rules and student unions. You think these universities want their athletes under a union.
And if these athletes want to be under a contract they will want to start negotiating for more money. Cause if I am a star player, That backup will not be making more than me. That goes back to student subsidizing the sport programs at these universities.
Nope. Not employees at all. It's a trust fund. Nobody is getting paid while they play.
And again, the "state" is not paying for the fund.
The school (out of sports profits), the NCAA, and the conference.
Or just the NCAA, the conferences, and the Bowl/tournament organizations.
And like I said, the pay tiers will be prenegotiated and based on whether they become starters or based on the playing time they end up getting in their time at the school.
And like the pros and schollys, each school will have a cap on the pay tiers that they can give out.
It ain't as hard to figure out as y'all making it.
Y'all just falling for that Slave-master okey doke that its "too expensive" or too difficult or that it goes against "tradition".
If *anybody* on a college campus is being paid to be there, then please believe that *everybody* can be paid.
Hell all these "red tape" ? arguments could be made about the scholarships themselves.
That's a trade off with monetary value in itself, but somehow putting money in the players pockets at some point is "impossible"?
Funny how the pay questions never come up when players are given thousands of dollars worth of merchandise via gift-bags at bowl games or championship rings worth thousands when they win something.
From a legal and "title 9" standpoint, a lawyer could argue that "every student athlete" at Alabama should get a $10k iced out championship ring and not just the football players.
Foh.
You know the whole EA scandal comes from the NCAA avoiding a trust fund situation. the ED O'Bannon case uses the trust fund idea and the NCAA is losing money to avoid that. It goes back to the quote in the Law review. Billie Jean King wrote, “The real issue is not how much money the plan would cost, but how much control the colleges are willing to give up.”
NCAA just doesn't wanna pay -- and that's my point.
And the same excuses y'all using are the exact ? that they're using (and even some of the stuff the Confederacy tried to convince Abraham Lincoln into believing before he ban-hammered the south.)
The greedy will fight tooth and nail to maintain their greed, lying and exaggerating is the easy part. -
Lets keep the debate on topic and stop sensationalizing with overboard comparisons.
I am not against players being paid but if they want to get paid. I would rather it be within a minor league environment not subsidized labor that in most cases are paid by the student body. -
Let's keep all arguments on topic. You second guessed my idea and then did a *180 into basically saying that the NCAA "already didn't wanna do that".
Okay - and that's my point. There are multiple ways to pay these players, most of which are simple and revolve around common sense --- but (drum roll please) LIKE SLAVERY --- they just don't wanna pay up because no corporation wants to cut into profits if they've gotten away for decades without it.
That's the only REAL hurdle in all of this. They. Don't. Want. To. Pay.
-
............orrrrrrrrr theres no REASON to pay them
-
the o.g. topic was actually not about weather players should get paid or not but if you are the NCAA what is the benifit for the NCAA and their schools to paying players? Its not like there is a dire need to pay players financially and if they pay players its not going to really help their bottom line financially.
-
Monizzle14 wrote: »the o.g. topic was actually not about weather players should get paid or not but if you are the NCAA what is the benifit for the NCAA and their schools to paying players? Its not like there is a dire need to pay players financially and if they pay players its not going to really help their bottom line financially.
Exactly why there is no reason to pay them.
There is nothing but negative possibilities for the NCAA if they decide to pay them, and no negatives if they continue not to. What, student athletes gonna go on strike? Lol ? no.
Literally no reason for them to be paid. -
Monizzle14 wrote: »the o.g. topic was actually not about weather players should get paid or not but if you are the NCAA what is the benifit for the NCAA and their schools to paying players? Its not like there is a dire need to pay players financially and if they pay players its not going to really help their bottom line financially.
Exactly why there is no reason to pay them.
There is nothing but negative possibilities for the NCAA if they decide to pay them, and no negatives if they continue not to. What, student athletes gonna go on strike? Lol ? no.
Literally no reason for them to be paid.
excatly and as a kid who graduated may 2012 from college i miss the hell outta college. You honestly can't put a price on a full ride to some of the best times you will ever have in your life. So you don't make the nfl who the ? cares there is prolly a booster for your school that will get you a 60K job which is a ? load of money outta college athlete or not. -
Then honestly, that's a pretty dumb topic.
There is a NEVER a good reason to pay anyone if you can get away with not paying them.
The only decent reason is that a tiered payment fund would motivate them help the team win a lil more than it normally would.
And again, any "payment" discussion for college players has to be about the "possible" pro prospects -- not the guaranteed, hands down, top draft picks. There's nothing keeping them in the amateur ranks -- in any sport.
? , most top young tennis and golf prospects go pro before finishing high school.
And lol @ the "college experience" ish. I don't know y'all nikkas situations, but understand that these the vast majority of these kids wouldn't even be in college without sports, and they have pressures and struggles hanging over their heads that the average "college kid" couldn't even understand.
My fondest memory of college was when I got a paid internship that helped me pay for that expensive muthafucka.
College ain't extended "day care" for every student like it is for some. -
greenwood1921 wrote: »Then honestly, that's a pretty dumb topic.
There is a NEVER a good reason to pay anyone if you can get away with not paying them.
The only decent reason is that a tiered payment fund would motivate them help the team win a lil more than it normally would.
And again, any "payment" discussion for college players has to be about the "possible" pro prospects -- not the guaranteed, hands down, top draft picks. There's nothing keeping them in the amateur ranks -- in any sport.
? , most top young tennis and golf prospects go pro before finishing high school.
And lol @ the "college experience" ish. I don't know y'all nikkas situations, but understand that these the vast majority of these kids wouldn't even be in college without sports, and they have pressures and struggles hanging over their heads that the average "college kid" couldn't even understand.
My fondest memory of college was when I got a paid internship that helped me pay for that expensive muthafucka.
College ain't extended "day care" for every student like it is for some.
Yeah but if these cats don't agree with the NCAA then don't go to play college sports. These cats know excatly what they are signing up for and aren't forced into ? . Its not child labor or slavery or industrial jobs in the late 1800's where there were no safety or labor protection.
You can't put a price on free ? you get just cuz you a college athlete the full ride many get cause they an athlete. You got cats from the hood that only on partial scholarships even if they do get paid a lil and most that money will have to go toward future expenses like books and foot and ? . Its still 10 times harder for a non student athlete who lives in the same appartment complex as a 5 star recruit and they both head off to the same college for 4 years. -
Monizzle14 wrote: »greenwood1921 wrote: »Then honestly, that's a pretty dumb topic.
There is a NEVER a good reason to pay anyone if you can get away with not paying them.
The only decent reason is that a tiered payment fund would motivate them help the team win a lil more than it normally would.
And again, any "payment" discussion for college players has to be about the "possible" pro prospects -- not the guaranteed, hands down, top draft picks. There's nothing keeping them in the amateur ranks -- in any sport.
? , most top young tennis and golf prospects go pro before finishing high school.
And lol @ the "college experience" ish. I don't know y'all nikkas situations, but understand that these the vast majority of these kids wouldn't even be in college without sports, and they have pressures and struggles hanging over their heads that the average "college kid" couldn't even understand.
My fondest memory of college was when I got a paid internship that helped me pay for that expensive muthafucka.
College ain't extended "day care" for every student like it is for some.
Yeah but if these cats don't agree with the NCAA then don't go to play college sports. These cats know excatly what they are signing up for and aren't forced into ? . Its not child labor or slavery or industrial jobs in the late 1800's where there were no safety or labor protection.
You can't put a price on free ? you get just cuz you a college athlete the full ride many get cause they an athlete. You got cats from the hood that only on partial scholarships even if they do get paid a lil and most that money will have to go toward future expenses like books and foot and ? . Its still 10 times harder for a non student athlete who lives in the same appartment complex as a 5 star recruit and they both head off to the same college for 4 years.
Bruh, any "argument" that can be attempted to justify making millions and billions off the back of free labor can be used in ANY corporate structure.
Yes, basketball and football players do "have to" deal with the NCAA's rules for the most part because the NFL and NBA have implemented rules over the past decade that forces a player to have a certain amount of years between high school and the pros.
And not playing at all or playing in a lower level league (NAIA) or playing in a semi-pro league can be a detriment to their draft stock.
NCAA is benefiting from a structure of tradition and fake ass morality that allows them to continue to not pay these kids. Which is exactly why it can be compared to slavery.
Slavery was "tradition" and "culture" in the south. And they initially used fake ass "logic" and morality by suggesting that blacks weren't full fledged humans in the first place and were pretty much put here by ? to be slaves.
The NCAA knows that all these lil Nikkas grow up seeing the Alabama's and Oklahoma's in a brighter light and pedestal than the Grambling's and Langston's and they know that they can get away with the fake "moral" defense of providing "free education" and "once in a lifetime experience".
? , the NFL would love to try the same ? , but the "tradition" of pro sports suggests that pro athletes get paid cash -- so they would never get away with it.
Arthur Blank would love to just have all the Falcon players live in those "dorms" he built for training camp and provide each player with a $80k car to drive and free food and tell them "the real value of playing in the NFL is the experience and the exclusive opportunity to live in our wonderful Flowery Branch Compound for a few years. And if you do a good job, we might help you get a job making 60k as a Home Depot manager, 'cause after all, the average NFL career is less than 4 years."
Player's reaction to that ? ...
Was watching Jerry Springer one day, and heard the coldest ? I ever heard a ? say to the question of "why should a woman sacrifice her body and give you all the money"...
Because I tell her to.
And you can lie to yourself and say "that ain't the same" just 'cause you can't refute it otherwise, but understand that a ? is on that track right now as I type this because she THINKS she has no other choice.
And that ? 's main duty day in and day out is to make sure she keeps believing that lie.
-
Lol no college ball cannot be compared to slavery.
"Money is being made off free labor"
Oh? Last time I checked providing housing and scholarships cost money...
"Neither slaves nor players have a choice..."
Slaves choices were "be a slave" or "be killed" or "be on the run and then be killed/forced back to slavery when caught"
We talking life or death here. Not too much of a choice.
No one is forcing athletes (90% of whom won't make the league) to play college ball. If you were black, you were FORCED to be a slave.greenwood1921 wrote: »The NCAA knows that all these lil Nikkas grow up seeing the Alabama's and Oklahoma's in a brighter light and pedestal than the Grambling's and Langston's and they know that they can get away with the fake "moral" defense of providing "free education" and "once in a lifetime experience".
LOL WHAT how is free education (up to 100K for the bigger schools) a fake moral defense. That is a legitimate BONUS these ? are getting and the MAIN reason they shouldn't be getting paid any extra. -
lol. You wanna know how slavery and pimpin did (and still does) exist? Just read this thread.
And before anybody asks -- thinking they're saying something -- I fully support pimpin - er, I mean college football. Just like I support my country (to a certain degree) and pay taxes.
I know the Nikes I wear are produced by viciously underpaid sweatshop workers...
...But they make a good product. I just wish the ones responsible for the product were compensated fairly.
Whenever a dollar is being made, all persons involved run the risk of being the ? or the ? in the situation. Or the slave or the slave master.
Some of us know how to avoid being the ? or the slave, some of us don't.
*shrug*
^^^ Free Education. And you don't even have to score a basket or a touchdown for me. -
You clearly are undervaluing the worth of a college degree. That's all this is.
-
You clearly are undervaluing the worth of a college degree. That's all this is.
Been there done that.
What I'm "valuing" is the value of the players to the billions that they generate.
There's "value" in spending years playing basketball and traveling the country with Michael Jordan in his prime and being coached by Phil Jackson.
You could write a book about and make a few hundred thousand. You could get all types of memorabilia signed and sell it for thousands. You can tell your kids, and grandkids about it.
You can use the experience to get coaching or scout jobs down the line in college and the pros because of it...
...But you think B.J. Armstrong or Scottie Pippen or Tony Kukoc would've played for the Bulls for free in the 90s?
No. There's a lot of "value" in the experiences of any job other than the actual pay. That doesn't constitute the absence of pay.
-
greenwood1921 wrote: »
No. There's a lot of "value" in the experiences of any job other than the actual pay. That doesn't constitute the absence of pay.
Keyword in this sentence is "job".
Being in any major league is a job, a career.
Being in college is not. It is school. You can get in for free, but you don't get paid just for being in school, regardless of what extracurricular activities you may participate in. -
Going to class ain't a job. Football is extra curricular just like a work study program or any other job at the school. (like an RA).
Like I said, where money's being made, people can get paid.
If you don't realize that. Good luck. -
i think if they could get away with not paying their tuition and associated costs for school, they'd maybe pay them directly. maybe get paid upon completion of each semester or something like that. make them take out student loans, and compensate them for the money they may not get b/c of the limitations on working part time jobs.
-
greenwood1921 wrote: »Monizzle14 wrote: »greenwood1921 wrote: »Then honestly, that's a pretty dumb topic.
There is a NEVER a good reason to pay anyone if you can get away with not paying them.
The only decent reason is that a tiered payment fund would motivate them help the team win a lil more than it normally would.
And again, any "payment" discussion for college players has to be about the "possible" pro prospects -- not the guaranteed, hands down, top draft picks. There's nothing keeping them in the amateur ranks -- in any sport.
? , most top young tennis and golf prospects go pro before finishing high school.
And lol @ the "college experience" ish. I don't know y'all nikkas situations, but understand that these the vast majority of these kids wouldn't even be in college without sports, and they have pressures and struggles hanging over their heads that the average "college kid" couldn't even understand.
My fondest memory of college was when I got a paid internship that helped me pay for that expensive muthafucka.
College ain't extended "day care" for every student like it is for some.
Yeah but if these cats don't agree with the NCAA then don't go to play college sports. These cats know excatly what they are signing up for and aren't forced into ? . Its not child labor or slavery or industrial jobs in the late 1800's where there were no safety or labor protection.
You can't put a price on free ? you get just cuz you a college athlete the full ride many get cause they an athlete. You got cats from the hood that only on partial scholarships even if they do get paid a lil and most that money will have to go toward future expenses like books and foot and ? . Its still 10 times harder for a non student athlete who lives in the same appartment complex as a 5 star recruit and they both head off to the same college for 4 years.
Bruh, any "argument" that can be attempted to justify making millions and billions off the back of free labor can be used in ANY corporate structure.
Yes, basketball and football players do "have to" deal with the NCAA's rules for the most part because the NFL and NBA have implemented rules over the past decade that forces a player to have a certain amount of years between high school and the pros.
And not playing at all or playing in a lower level league (NAIA) or playing in a semi-pro league can be a detriment to their draft stock.
NCAA is benefiting from a structure of tradition and fake ass morality that allows them to continue to not pay these kids. Which is exactly why it can be compared to slavery.
Slavery was "tradition" and "culture" in the south. And they initially used fake ass "logic" and morality by suggesting that blacks weren't full fledged humans in the first place and were pretty much put here by ? to be slaves.
The NCAA knows that all these lil Nikkas grow up seeing the Alabama's and Oklahoma's in a brighter light and pedestal than the Grambling's and Langston's and they know that they can get away with the fake "moral" defense of providing "free education" and "once in a lifetime experience".
? , the NFL would love to try the same ? , but the "tradition" of pro sports suggests that pro athletes get paid cash -- so they would never get away with it.
Arthur Blank would love to just have all the Falcon players live in those "dorms" he built for training camp and provide each player with a $80k car to drive and free food and tell them "the real value of playing in the NFL is the experience and the exclusive opportunity to live in our wonderful Flowery Branch Compound for a few years. And if you do a good job, we might help you get a job making 60k as a Home Depot manager, 'cause after all, the average NFL career is less than 4 years."
Player's reaction to that ? ...
Was watching Jerry Springer one day, and heard the coldest ? I ever heard a ? say to the question of "why should a woman sacrifice her body and give you all the money"...
Because I tell her to.
And you can lie to yourself and say "that ain't the same" just 'cause you can't refute it otherwise, but understand that a ? is on that track right now as I type this because she THINKS she has no other choice.
And that ? 's main duty day in and day out is to make sure she keeps believing that lie.
but how did the slave culture end? people protested and pettitioned and factors came about the put plantation owners to be forced eventually to give up slave labor. things don't change without protest. If the top players stopped playing college sports then it would change the game. And it already has happened. the top golfers and tennis players don't go to college as a result college golf and tennis isn't popular. Same with baseball.
Around a 3rd of all the picks in this years NBA draft were players who never played NCAA baksetball. Look at Brandon Jennings who went overseas and played ball. For most NCAA sports you don't have to go to college to be top ranked. And for most sports there isn't a huge payout for being a top player after your leave school or leave early. Football is the only exception where 9 times out of 10 you have to play NCAA ball to get scouted to the NFL. But that is 1 sport out of hundreds of NCAA sports.
And lets not act like college football players don't have extreme access and luxury in the top schools. From chartered flights to team meals to free access to state of the art facilities as well as a staff of doctors and nutritions. And for many coaches the 4 years of college are like an internship to getting a coaching job right out of college or post grad school where they see a piece of the pie or go to another school and get a job.
-
Hasn't been working so far with players getting paid under the table, ? are still going to the league if they're projected as lottery picks. College thousands of dollars versus Professional hundred thousands-to-millions of dollars and I'm going pro. But paying players something wouldn't hurt, especially at a lot of these BCS conference school where they're making long bread off of them ? playing for those schools. I remember seeing that 30-for-30 on the Fab Five and they said they knew something wasn't right when they saw their jerseys being bought in the store and they were still broke in their dorm rooms. The only thing that even keeps a lot of the best players in college in the first place is the possibility of them not getting drafted high in the first place.
-
ParallelRhymes wrote: »Highly doubtful considering the NCAA would not be able to match the amount of money that the professional leagues could offer.
Top prospects would still likely leave regardless.
and that is the issue if you are in the shoes of a greedy AD or the NCAA president. Top players would leave and there is no incentive to share profit with players and give them a full ride of it doesn't mean top players will stay. Cause a few top players can mean millions of $'s than if those players went pro.
