Boise State football coach Chris Petersen says school needs to offer NCAA's new $2,000 stipend to athletes

By Chadd Cripe
© 2011 Idaho Statesman

Boise State football coach Chris Petersen said it’s “extremely” important that Boise State offer athletes the additional $2,000 per year stipend approved by the NCAA. Each conference will decide whether to allow its schools to offer the money. The six Bowl Championship Series conferences are expected to do so.

Boise State will need about $500,000 to pay the additional money to each of its scholarship athletes.

“Everybody gets that,” Petersen said of keeping up with the BCS leagues. “It can, and probably will, separate the haves from the have-nots. That would be a big thing in recruiting.”

Petersen said some players rely on their parents or federal grants for financial assistance but many of them can’t get help from either. Scholarships cover tuition and fees, books, room and board but not travel, clothing and entertainment.

“The scholarship check really is not enough,” he said.

The NCAA also has approved use of multi-year scholarships, with provisions for schools to cancel those agreements if there are off-the-field issues. Current scholarship agreements are for one year at a time.

Petersen doesn’t like that move. He said he doesn’t remove players from his team based on ability alone and doesn’t see any problems with the current model.

“What we have done is we’ve sat down and said, ‘Listen, you probably are not going to play here,’ ” Petersen said. “Ninety-nine out of 100, they want to play, so we’re on the same page there and we can help them go play somewhere else. If they say they love it here — if he’s a good guy and doing fine in school — that’s on us. Then he can stay.”


UNLV has switched back to sophomore Caleb Herring as the starting quarterback. Herring was benched in favor of junior college transfer Sean Reilly for the Oct. 15 game at Wyoming.

Herring practiced well last week and entered early in the Colorado State game on Saturday. He led the Rebels to a 38-35 victory. He was 9-of-13 for 90 yards and two touchdowns and also rushed for the game-winning touchdown with 1:20 left.


Boise State’s opponents have been giving the Broncos’ schedule strength a boost in recent weeks. Their five non-conference opponents are a combined 18-2 in their leagues, with Tulsa (4-0 in Conference USA), Nevada (3-0 in WAC) and Toledo (4-0 in Mid-American) unbeaten.


The Broncos rank third among undefeated teams in total defense and scoring defense, behind Alabama and LSU. All three teams rank in the top 16 in both categories.

If you factor in the offenses each team has played, there is little separation between the defenses.

Alabama allows 180.5 yards per game, which is 163.0 yards per game below their opponents’ average in games against all other opponents.

Boise State allows 300.6 yards per game, which is 146.7 better than their opponents’ average.

And LSU allows 251.4, which is 137.6 yards better than the opponents’ average.

Stanford has a differential of 84.8 yards.

The other two unbeatens are ranked in the bottom third nationally in total defense — Houston (86th) and Oklahoma State (111th).


I went through my voting procedure last night just to keep my system consistent. Here’s how I likely would have voted in the AP poll on Sunday if I hadn’t been on furlough:

2 Alabama
3 Boise State
4 Okla State
5 Stanford
6 Oregon
7 Arkansas
8 Clemson
9 Oklahoma
10 South Carolina
11 Nebraska
12 Virginia Tech
13 Kansas St
14 Michigan
15 Georgia
16 Arizona St
17 Michigan St.
18 Wisconsin
19 Houston
20 USC
21 Penn State
22 Georgia Tech
23 Auburn
24 Southern Miss
25 Cincinnati

1320178452 Boise State football coach Chris Petersen says school needs to offer NCAA's new $2,000 stipend to athletes Idaho Statesman Copyright 2014 Idaho Statesman . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Well, there you go.....

it's a done deal. If Coach Pete says it needs to happen then make it happen. Nothing else has to be said and nothing else is important.

Well, there you go


I like being a HAVE.

Looks like we have to go to the Little Least to have enough money to pay this extra 2,000. I see no way the Mtn (we'll tell you what to wear on your own field) West can afford it. So let's start a frequent flyers program and get this party started!


I would switch Okla State and BSU, but I agree with the rest. For those folks who argue against BSU's strength of schedule, I invite you to take a gander at Jeff Sagarin's computer models. Now, the numbers will probably change in the coming weeks, but up to this week, BSU's SoS has been as tough or better than many of their top ten fellows.


That's a close call and I look at it every week. At this point, I'm going with Boise State because the Broncos' defense is far superior.

Chris Petersen(Completely Agree with you)

A question for all you blogging- What about Bob? As we know Bob is against the stipend.A difference of opinion between Chris Petersen and Bob-that is what life is all about disagreements are good!

But...He was against it before he was for it...

Kustra isn't against it, he's just leveraging whatever helps BSU. Consider:

1- Bob would talk on and on of the corrupt BCS system, now he's gonna join it.
2- Bob said joining the MWC was best for BSU athletes, and they deserved a geographical footprint better than the WAC, now he's willing to sit everyone else at the kids table (WAC, WCC, Big West, whatever) so the football engine can play games back East for millistacks.
4- And I'll bet, now that Petersen wants BSU to pay players a 2k stipend, Kustra will find his rationale why he now feels its ok to partake in it.

You see, sometimes, you just have to spin stuff a little so it gets done right. Its a nice lil' skill set that Kustra brings to the table, we should be so lucky to have him.

You seem like a smart guy

so what's with the dumb post? ;-)

It has three barbed wires nailed to it and cattle respect it.


Everybody wants to hue the knurled

No, that's a fence post.

Good try though...keep up the hard work and you'll get there.

It's electrified and you all rub it for fun.


Everybody wants to hue the knurled

Galena....Excellent see

what is happening and a weird trend-line....

Coach Pete:
1. Wants athletic facilities while visiting Stanford (or else)....
2. Says now is time for 10,000 seats....
3. Says now we must spend half mill for $2,000 each athlete....

The financial needs are ahead of the finances....just becasue Boise State football had gross revenues of around $18 million, does not mean they made $18 mill....

The Big East move is only $8million more to the program....that can be easily engulfed thru coaching wages (future), facilities, 10000 seats, and additional travel....

Wow....times are changing fast....what will come of this? what demands are next?

Ugly - you forgot . . .

. . . Bronco Bob is for playoffs and against a continuation of the BCS, after he read "Death To The BCS", last Fall. He made his position known publicly and we debated it ad nauseum on these boards.

Coach Pete is for a continuation of the BCS and against playoffs. He made his position known publicly, Last Fall, and we debated it ad nauseum on these boards.

It appears as though Coach Pete and Bronco Bob seem to not agree on many important issues (including the important ones you brought up). They are at lauger heads and Bronco Bob is supposedly the Big Boss. Time will tell how long Bronco Bob will sit in his chair and play Second Fiddle. Something is gonna give, real soon, I am guessing.

It also, appears as though Coach Pete is formulating and implementing the future structure and direction of BSU, as a football university and a Regional Destination University, with or wihtout Bronco Bob's participation/concurrence.

I am getting kind of curious why Bronco Bob allows Coach Pete to constantly disagree with him - publicly. All I can conclude is that Coach Pete has the best interests of the Bronco Football Team at heart (and consequently, BSU's market positioning and national identification/branding, as a football university), while Bronco Bob is trying to keep academics, as somewhat of a focus for BSU (irrelevant as it may be to winning football games).

Of course we know that Coach Pete will always prevail over Bronco Bob, as long as the Bronco Football Team is winning.

My money is on Coach Pete to be at BSU, when Bronco Bob is picking gravel with the chickens.

I only care that the Bronco Football Team wins a FBS Natty to bring great credit to the State of Idaho. Coach Pete can get us there. Bronco Bob is an impediment to Pete's Progress. All this concern for academics at BSU is just silly stuff, when everybody knows that BSU is really a Nationally Recognized Football Powerhouse and makes Big Bucks from winning games.

BAA Member Number #63799

PS - The use of the term 'Bronco Bob' is not meant as any disrespect to President Robert Kustra - it is just easier to type and uses less letters.

PPS - I am all for giving the football players more money to play the game, as they bring in a tremendous amount of revenue for BSU. They are worth every penny of their labor, from a business standpoint. They more than pay for themselves.

PPPS - Possibly another option might be to make it even more 'incentivized' and pay a bonus per win. Maybe $1K for a win of 30 or more points than the opponent and $500.00 for just a win of less than 30 points than the opponent. Lots of ideas for them to make more money now that it looks like there will be more 'Pay For Play'.

VNDL....No doubt, the Bronco football

program brings in alot of money for BSU and for the city of Boise (lodging, restarants, taxis, partys, etc.)....

The current scenario between the two remaining Amigos reminds me alittle of Al Davis and John Madden....

The stipends to the players that bring in alot is not the problem, it is the finances itself....if this were Nebraska, it would be no problem at all....however, with Boise success is growing faster than their financial future....

I might be wrong, but I think the Big East move will bring about $8 million more dollars to the football program?

On BCS, I agree with Coach Pete....Boise is where they are today because of the rulings for the best non-AQ and an BCS Bowl invite....If this were the old system before 1998, Boise would not be rated #5 right now....

PS....Ugly may be a BAA member soon....I called BAA office and Sharon thought the transactions probably went thru (all of them)....she is checking into it....


Sharon is a very nice lady. She is the sister of my neighbor.

She is a Vandal and so is he (Junior High teacher and high school cross country and track coach).

I always find it interesting that the BAA does not have a problem with Vandals, but some of the interloper common Bronco fans (non BAA Members) on these boards do.

If the stipends come from BAA and donated/contributed monies from Bronco Supporters/Boosters, I really do not see the finances as a problem. It is just a matter of 'rounding up' more money from Bronco supporters/boosters. Shouldn't be too hard to get half-a-mil ($.5M) to make up the difference. Just raise the BAA dues for next year. Not a biggie.

I don't think any state monies will be used for the stipends, as I don't think athletics schollies are paid for by state monies. I think it is all BAA donated money. I could be wrong though. If anybody knows for sure - please weigh in.

BAA Member Number #63799

He said

that he would try, but others would not be able to pay the 2K stipend.

The difference is....

Coach Petersen has more power than Bob. So, Bob will have to deal and will have to make a statement that appears that it was his idea and he is supportive of the plan, because Bob has great difficulty admitting that Coach Petersen is more powerful and that Bob can be replaced and no one would really even notice, or otherwise care, but if Coach Petersen is replaced their will be candlelight vigals, calls to the statehouse, letters to the Governor, etc.

Guess all the BCS schools...

.... can't figure out how to spend all the money they get fast enough. "80k,90k,100k seat stadiums that can't expand too much more - check. excellent arenas - check. practice facilities - check. what to buy now, players? - check." So unfortunate that we have to pay players to keep from getting even more left behind before we can catch up.

BSU fans please vote

BSU fans Vote once a day everyday

Kellen is in first place with fan votes in the O'Brien. He needs your vote also in the Heisman. Please vote all three everyday.

GO Broncos

Nick Saben

stated in an interview the other day that he felt only BCS schools should be able to give out $2000 stipends to their athletics. To me this inferred that non AQ schools should be left out. If you can't beat the Boise States of this world with the current already flawed system just add a few more road blocks.

did he really?

Can you post a link to where he said this? I'm not challenging you on this, I would just like to read what he said. Thanks.

How are schollies funded?? Anybody know??

I had an interesting luncheon today with several CFB fans in Twin Falls. The big subject (which nobody really knew the answer to) we discussed was schollies for BSU Football Players. Here are some of our unanswered questions:

1. Do the monies for the athletics schollies come only from the BAA, or are there any state funds expended per schollie? Most seemed to think it is the BAA that funds the schollies , en toto, and no state monies are used. Are any other BSU donated funds used for the schollies besides the BAA monies? Any monies generated by athletics revenues - ticket sales - Bronco Gear royalties, and etc.? None of us had a clue.

2. How many years can the schollies cover academic expenses for - four years, five years, six years? We discussed how the football players and other athletes sometimes take 6 years to graduate, per recent published statistics. Does this mean they are still on schollie when they have used up their 5 years of eligibility (1 red shirt year and 4 regular years) and need one more year to graduate?

3. What do the schollies actually pay for? Books and supplies at the BSU Bookstore, lab fees, tuition and other student fees, food at a school cafeteria, snacks at night, or free milk to drink, Bronco Gear at the Bookstore? Seriously, what do the schollies pay for - can an athlete get a computer and/or printer or I-POD or I-PAD at the Bookstore if they have a credit balance? Or is it a 'use it or lose it' type of situation by the end of a semester?

4. Are any of the unused monies, not used in a given semester transferrable to the next semester (credit balances)?

5. Are schollies used for Summer School? If so, are they additional schollie money over and above the two regular academic semesters (Fall and Spring)?

6. How is the schollie money administered? Is it a transaction between the Bookstore/Registrar sending a bill to a schollie administrator - or do the players get a check for a certain schollie amount at the beginning of each semester and pay as they go and if they run out - so be it?

7. Do the athletes have to pay regular student athletics activity fees for tickets to the sporting events? For example, do football players pay for tickets to football games as part of their automaticaly deducted student fee bill - like normal students?

8. Do the athletes get additional free tickets for their family members as part of the schollie monies or is that a 'comp' by the BAA for a player?

The more we dug into the questions, the more we realized how uninformed (ignorant) we were regarding athletics schollies at BSU.

If anybody knows some answers to these questions - I would love to hear from you.

Serious responses only, please.

BAA Member Number #63799

I guess nobody . . .

. . . knows any answers.

BAA Member Number #63799

I've been saying this for like 50 years

five of which I wasn't even born in the Kennedy and Johnson years.


Everybody wants to hue the knurled

Still nobody knows and has any answers

Anybody care to take a shot at coming up with some answers.

Somebody out there, surely must know about some of this stuff.

BAA Member Number #63799

Okay - it's important - now what? Anybody care to answer this?

Fugly - Here is a little 3-D thinking for your perusal and enjoyment:

Per the main thread article: " . . . Boise State football coach Chris Petersen said it’s “extremely” important that Boise State offer athletes the additional $2,000 per year stipend approved by the NCAA. Each conference will decide whether to allow its schools to offer the money. The six Bowl Championship Series conferences are expected to do so. . . Boise State will need about $500,000 to pay the additional money to each of its scholarship athletes. . . . Everybody gets that,” Petersen said of keeping up with the BCS leagues. “It can, and probably will, separate the haves from the have-nots. That would be a big thing in recruiting.”


For discussion purposes, let's assume BSU goes to the Big East and the Big East votes, as a conference, to NOT go with the $2,000 additional stipend for athletes. Now, Coach Pete has said how important it is to have the $2,000 additional stipend for athletes, as an aid for recruiting.

What does BSU do then? BSU is now in a conference which makes it harder for BSU to compete with other BCS conference teams for recruits. Maybe this should be ironed out and decided on whre the wind is gonna blow - BEFORE - BSU committs to the Big East?

Also, BSU is maybe going to the Big East for football only and possibly the WAC for the rest of the sports (but is not going to stay in the MWC).

What if the Big East says no to the $2,000 additional stipend for football teams and the WAC says yes to the $2,000 additional stipend for athletes?

Does this now mean all BSU athletes except for the football players will be getting a $2,000 additional stipend, annually?


What if Coach Pete does not get what he wants and thinks to be “extremely” important that Boise State offer athletes the additional $2,000 per year stipend?

I know, I know - the power of positive thinking and all; and I could possibly be perceived as a 'Debbie Downer' . But, in all reality - this is a scenario that could happen. And if it did - then what?

BAA Member Number #63799

PS - What if the Big East says 'yes' to an increase of $2,000 additional stipend for football players and the WAC says 'no' to an increase of $2,000 additional stipend for all athletes in the conference (with BSU football not being in the WAC, but instead, in the Big East)? Does that mean the Bronco football players are the only ones getting the $2,000 additional stipend and how the heck would that satiate the requirements of Title IX and a basic common sense doctrine of 'Equity and Fairness' for all BSU athletes?

VNDL....Good question

weisburg responded, but if he is correct; then Coach Pete's statement does not make any sense....

Is the $2000 already established for all athletes, from football to cross-country?

My opinion, is football needs to set a set-aside fund for its program only by donors specifying as designated funds....if not, then monies goes to all....

I love running and other sports; but football is usually the pride of the town and the it needs to succeed....

If Big East says yes, and WAC says no....then title9 will have to deal with that issue....I say football comes first and the sharing of monies can still be dealt with an equatable basis....

This is why I prefer Boise State Broncos as an Independent....let the other sports go WAC, or whatever and they can have those monies....

Ugly - my point was . . .

. . . each conference approves or disapproves the members giving $2K stipends to their athletes. The members are bound by the majority/conference decision. No mavericks allowed.

BSU could wind up in two conferences (one for fotball only and one for all other sports).

How can BSU give $2K stipends to their players/athletes, if the conference says 'no' to stipends ('no' means none for any member - not a 'you can do it if you want to'. It would be prohibitive and perscriptive in nature, with no discretion for a member to go ahead and give the stipends anyway. One rule for all members.

Conversely, if the conference says 'yes' in a permissive and not perscriptive sense, then BSU is at choice to not give the $2K stipends to their players in a 'yes' conference - or run the risk of having inequity among BSU athletes? Is that really what BSU wants?

See my point?

There could be no sharing of monies for an equitable basis, as there could be no Title IX remedy to the conundrum.

It is either - 'everybody in the pool - or - nobody in the pool' the way I am seeing it unfold.

I am betting the Big East will be a 'yes' conference and the WAC a 'no' conference, and BSU will have a real royal chocolate mess on their hands.

Maybe that is what the hold up is - BSU is wanting to hold off and read the tea leaves as to what the conference votes will more than likely be.

Just a guess on my part.

BAA Member Number #63799

VNDL...I see your point made and think

Boise needs to be careful....

They have a bit of arrogance right now....just joining the mwc and now wanting to move to Big East leaving a major snub in mwc face....ready to jump ship when barely joined; and leaving a couple faithfuls such as Fresno and Nevada in dust....

acting like they are now too good for Fresno, Nevada, and even Idaho....

Notre Dame is better....thru the years, they have kept their rivlaries....

and yes, Big East may ok....and WAC says, no....the $2000?

Boise is just coming to the BCS table and they need to evaluate carefully....

Once in the Big East, they are stuck in the Big East....What conference would want the famous conference jumper then?

Fugly - Yep a real mess & an annual 5% COLA raise

It could turn out that Bronco football players would be authorized to get $2K additional stipends, because the Big East authorizes it for its member schools. I think authorizing would mean a member school could choose to give the $2K additional stipend to schollie playrs if the member school chose to do so. I don't think it would mean the member school would have to do it or be mandated to do it - just that it would be okay with the conference to do it if the member school chose to do it.

But, we know what Coach Pete would do - as he has said it is 'extremely important' to give the Bronco football schollie players more money to live on. He would not withhold the money from his players based on any doctrine of equity or fairness to all BSU athletes. Why should he. He is about winning football games and making BSU more money. He is not the 'tiddledeewinks' coach. The Bronco football players would come first - and rightfully so - as the Bronco football players are the 'key bill payers' for BSU and the prime generators of the revenue stream. All other athletes and sports programs, are just kinda there because, it has been mandated to have them there, if we are totally honest about it. If the BSU AD's office, were truley ran as a 100% busines, it would be best to dump all other BSU athletics teams/programs and just concentrate on one 'Mover and Shaker', the Bronco Football Team. Efficiency and the maximization of fiscal resource to goal attainment and revenue stream generation (profit enhancement).

Of course the Bronco football playrs would want the additional stipends, as that would result in more money for them. Who in their right mind would turn it down if they could get it?

Coach Pete would be happy, because it would help his recruiting efforts.

But, remember - the Big East would only take the BSU Football Program and not any other BSU sports programs, under the current scenario that has been reported to death this past week.

What if,

the remaining BSU athletics programs went to the WAC or even the Big Sky (as some news entities have speculated about) and neither one of those conferences authorizes its member schools to allow an additional $2K stipend to athletes in said conference.

What then????

Would Coach Pete go ahead and give the Bronco football playrs an addiltional $2K stipend annually, while the rest of BSU athlets got no increase of an additional $2K stipend? I believe he would be professionally obligated to BSU to do so, as it would be the wisest business move to make. If other BSU athletes have a problem with it - so what - how much money do they make for BSU anyways. If they don't like it, they can always grab their tennis rackets or golf clubs and head back to Germany or Singapore.

There are no women athletes on the Bronco Football team, so I guess, there would not be any Title IX claim of discrimionation among a given and specific class of athletes (football players).

Maybe the Bronco football players would be more deserving of additional $2K stipends, because they bring in more revenue stream for BSU than the track team or women's golf does.

I really do not have an answer to the question, other than I could see it being litigated, in time.

So - it may not be $500K additional money to BSU but more likely $160K (80 football schollies times $2K additional stipend) for just the Bronco football schollie players.

Fairness and equity are not really important points in the long run, I am thinking. Whatever brings in the most revenue stream for BSU is prolly the best thing for BSU in the long run, from a pure business perspective. The important thing is to keep Coach Pete happy and get him the $2K additional stipend per player for the football players so Coach Pete can have another little weapon in his recruiting arsenal/toolbox to go out and impress the kids with and another incentive to come to BSU and play football.

If other Top Tier schools are gonna do it, BSU has gotta do it too. No sense in tying Coach Pete's hands behind his back when he goes recruiting, by BSU not having more money to offer top talent football players, when other schools got it and make sure the the kid's parents smell the check.

Who knows - maybe in time there will be a 5% COLA applied annually to the initial $2K additional stipend, to keep up with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and inflation. It would seem only fair as a loaf of bread is now approximately 225% higher than it was in 2005.

BAA Member Number #63799


Those of us on Social Security haven't had a COLA increase in nearly FOUR YEARS!

Do you think we give a crap about such a thing in their cases?

They can hang that COLA!


Everybody wants to hue the knurled


Yeah, times are tough for many....and I dont think they are getting any better....

I have done ok only cause getting debt way down....

Hope things are going well....

VNDL....Those are tough decisions coming


To me, it is easy....give the 2k to football since the Broncos are profitable....however, not all cfb teams are profitable....not all Big East cfb teams have a revenue in the black....I did the research awhile back and found only about 20% of cfb teams actually make money....

If left to gate receipts, most cfb teams fail....they rely heavily on advertizments, tv contracts, sponsorships, merchandise, alumni, and other funding (state?)....

Maybe BSU tennis argument is that the BAA has spent monies on football, therefore football is profitable....if BAA would spend same on tennis and build them a Wimbledon type arena of 10,000 seats with beer sales, revenues would increase too....

Nobody seems to know these answers, either

Come on guys, anybody want to take a stab at solving this riddle about what it would be like if BSU joined the Big East and that conference approved the $2K additional annual stipends for football players; but BSU joined another conference for all other sports and that conference does not approve the $2K additional annual stipends for athletes in that conference?

Does it mean the Bronco fotball players get $2K more money each year and get to eat Prime Rib and the other BSU athletes get to eat ramen noodles?

Is that what Coach Pete means when he talks about the 'haves' versus the 'have nots'? His players of course, being the 'haves'.

Anybody wanna take a stab at it?

BAA Member #63799


Your questions are good and I'll let an avid Bronco answer....but

I'll answer some because they are both good and difficult questions....

I think the $2000 could be worked out if the arrangements were known as BSU goes Big East and the other sports stay as current....

I'm pretty sure the BAA is for all Bronco Athletics....I'm 99% positive that all BAA employees are State employees, and not Bronco Football that is where the problem starts....

So eventhough the BAA is 99% concerned about Bronco Football financing, they must pretend to be concerned about the cross-country program to those very few callers that wonder about their funding (that caller could be Ugly)....

Thus, I think Coach Pete was stating that if we go Big East and get extra BCS monies, some of that monies must go to $2000 recruiting stipends for all football players....the skinny Ugly's can run for themselves....they (BAA) need to make sure that at least $500,000 is saved for the producers, not the skinny wannabees...

Also, it is a hint to BAA donors such as us....maybe we need a designated fund for football only and not a general fund to all athletics, including the skinny runner....

If Boise Football was Indy and other athletics WAC....all problems solved....

NCAA and Stipend

Bloggers (The stipend is for the student athletes-the NCAA approved it last week I wrote about the new rule in a Post-I am not sure if it was reported right away by the local paper.I read in the local paper that the pompous president of Boise State University was not excited about it- another angle too the new rule the Student Athletes scholarships will not have to be renewed every year-that is terrific for the student athlete The conferences will have the opportunity and the University will decide what to do with this new NCAA regarding the scholarships

This is the debate team-not football discussion forums.


Everybody wants to hue the knurled

FO - Apparently, your hue got knurled real hard & split open

Possibly, you have not made the connection between the $2K additional stipend for college football players and a discussion of college football - not to mention - the topic of the thread: "Boise State football coach Chris Petersen says school needs to offer NCAA's new $2,000 stipend to athletes"?


Throwing money when regulations needed working on is silly.

Money is not the answer.


It's a distraction

FO - totaly agreed

and the escalation and 'over the top' professionalization of CFB continues.

Who ya gonna call - BCS Busters?

BAA Member Number #63799

I don't have to. The train WILL derail shortly.


Everybody wants to hue the knurled


that the student athletes provide the entertainment for a multi-billion dollar industry and receive nothing, and are even punished for perceived gift of even $20. 2k is the least we could do for them. And like coach Pete says, for some its a deal breaker if you don't offer it. In fact I think anybody good enough to play should get it, scholarship or not. While the schools don't make nearly as much as the media, they make more than enough to pay for it.


at what point do you cross the line into paying them to play? This is supposed to be amateur athletics. Yes, I know that is old school and college athletics (especially big income sports such as football and basketball) haven't been "amateur" for years, however, that is what it is supposed to be and until it officially changes I would like to see it stay that way and I would like to try to stay in my "fantasy" world where college athletes play the sport because they love it and want to represent their university in that way and because they want to experience the joy of playing college sports, traveling, competing, and making lifelong memories. If I want to watch a bunch of spoiled, overpayed, entitled, atheletes that will only play if the money is right I will watch pro sports. If college keeps going the way it is going then I will have to look to high school sports, which after all won't be that bad. Anyway, sorry. I'll step down from my soapbox now and wait for the "you're and idiot" replies.