Wait-wait-wait-wait.....Cromartie can't read?

[LiveShot]

No brains big stud. Seven kids by six different women I'd hate to pay his child support. A shining example of a father. This moron is the acme of stupidity.

 

[upstater1]

Instead of using your made-up numbers, let's use the real numbers:

"According to filings college athletic departments make with the U.S. Department of Education, Ohio State is only the seventh most profitable team to go to a bowl this year, with revenue in the football program exceeding expenses by $28.5 million during the 2005-06 school year. Meanwhile Florida is No. 5, with an operating profit of $32.4 million."

Florida had profit edge over Ohio*State even*before upset - Jan. 8, 2007

These programs are making enormous piles of cash on the backs of the players. The coaches make millions. The NCAA and the colleges own the rights to the players images and names and make hundreds of millions of dollars every year licensing the players' property (their likenesses and images) to EA Sports and others. The only people that don't get compensated are the most deserving of compensation. This is called exploitation, and although it seems a lot of posters resent the special treatment athletes get while on campus, these posters are simply missing the bigger picture. It's beside the point whether a player decides to hit the books. He is WORKING, in many cases, 50+ hours a week for the football program. Why should he not be compensated at a market rate like anyone else who works for an employer? Why should he feel obligated to study? He is a football player, not a student. Because college football is a monopoly, there is no market for his services, so he is stuck, working for the school for four years for a scholarship that costs the school only a nominal amount, while he helps bring in the insane profits noted in the newstory above. The NCAA and the schools have fooled the world with the "student-athlete" moniker, allowing them to pocket enormous profits and avoid obligations like paying salaries or unemployment benefits.

Try this instead, and watch how schools hide the money they lose:

http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/revenue_stat/show

Now, choose Florida State because that's where Cromartie is from.

Florida State makes $18,349,000 in revenues.

Now, look at what those revenues come from:

$1 million is school guarantees. Every school funnels some money into the programs. Then look to the right at non-specific revenues. Almost $5 million in student fees. $2.5 million from the endowment. $1.5 million in other, whatever that is. Florida State has 240 athletic scholarships for men and women, with football taking 85, a little more than 33%. When you divide the number up, you realize that the school contributes more than $3 million to the football program.

So then look at expenses:

They have $11.7m in expenses so they make a profit of 6.6million. They pay the school 1.7million for tuition for players. How much do they give back to the school? A BIG FAT ZERO. That $6 million stays in the athletic department as you can see by the bottom line where only $164,000 remains after funding the programs (likely women's sports which they are required to fund by law).

Then there's the hidden cost: $17,000 is the reimbursement that the football program sends to the school for each student. But the cost of education per athlete far exceeds that. The average at the top American universities for state schools is in the $40k to $45k range. That's for education alone and not housing and room & board, books and fees. So, in essence, the athletes are getting $40k in education and $14k in living expenses, while the athletic department is paying back $17k. That $1.7 million reimbursement should be 3.5x higher from the football program to the school, and it constitutes a $5 million subsidy.

These are the real numbers. You take the $5 million subsidy for the cost of educating each student and add it to the $3 million subsidy above that is the proceeds from student fees and university support, and suddenly the football programs $6.6 million profit (which is rolled into the athletic department) becomes a $1.4 million loss to the university.

And even if after all this you argued that football players should be paid, what do you pay them? Do you pay them a different salary? And what do you tell all the other workers who get much less money than the football players are currently getting, workers who actually bring more value to the university's core mission?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

You say he can't read like it's a bad thing.
Consider this, The Cro won't be able to read the notably fickle and harsh NY sportswriters' criticisms of his play, inevitable after the JESTs again fail in their season.

 

[SyN65]

I seriously doubt his reading level is that low. He wouldn't even be in the NFL.

 

[letekro]

Try this instead, and watch how schools hide the money they lose:

http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/revenue_stat/show

Now, choose Florida State because that's where Cromartie is from.

Florida State makes $18,349,000 in revenues.

Now, look at what those revenues come from:

$1 million is school guarantees. Every school funnels some money into the programs. Then look to the right at non-specific revenues. Almost $5 million in student fees. $2.5 million from the endowment. $1.5 million in other, whatever that is. Florida State has 240 athletic scholarships for men and women, with football taking 85, a little more than 33%. When you divide the number up, you realize that the school contributes more than $3 million to the football program.

So then look at expenses:

They have $11.7m in expenses so they make a profit of 6.6million. They pay the school 1.7million for tuition for players. How much do they give back to the school? A BIG FAT ZERO. That $6 million stays in the athletic department as you can see by the bottom line where only $164,000 remains after funding the programs (likely women's sports which they are required to fund by law).

Then there's the hidden cost: $17,000 is the reimbursement that the football program sends to the school for each student. But the cost of education per athlete far exceeds that. The average at the top American universities for state schools is in the $40k to $45k range. That's for education alone and not housing and room & board, books and fees. So, in essence, the athletes are getting $40k in education and $14k in living expenses, while the athletic department is paying back $17k. That $1.7 million reimbursement should be 3.5x higher from the football program to the school, and it constitutes a $5 million subsidy.

These are the real numbers. You take the $5 million subsidy for the cost of educating each student and add it to the $3 million subsidy above that is the proceeds from student fees and university support, and suddenly the football programs $6.6 million profit (which is rolled into the athletic department) becomes a $1.4 million loss to the university.

And even if after all this you argued that football players should be paid, what do you pay them? Do you pay them a different salary? And what do you tell all the other workers who get much less money than the football players are currently getting, workers who actually bring more value to the university's core mission?

1. See the $16 million contribution figure under non program specific revenues? I'll give you one guess as to where 99% of that is headed. Most of the other schools in that database break contributions down by program (with almost all going to football) - FSU is trying to be sneaky by lumping it in their nonspecific category. Add that to football revenues, also add apparel, program, advertising, group licensing, and all other kinds of revenue and you might get a sense of the real number.

2. The market sets the rate.

3. What do you tell people that make less? They are not in possession of talents that can make their employer lots of money. The athletes are.

4. How do you define value? Some psychology professor that writes a bunch of "scholarly" articles that no one ever reads brings more "value" than a player that is part of team that brings more than $50M of revenues to the school per year (in the case of UF)?

 

[PatsChamp88]

I wish I could do this and not read...

 

[Patjew]

I wish I could do this and not read...

So does he.

 

[woolster22]

I seriously doubt his reading level is that low. He wouldn't even be in the NFL.

What reading comprehension is required for this exchange:
Coach- "follow number xx around, and knock the damn ball down if it comes your way!"
Cro- "Okay coach, I knocks down ball if they throws it at mine guy."
Coach-"Good job! Now that diminutive little punk is going to kick it to you high in the air. If you can catch it without getting killed, go for it. Otherwise wave your hand above your head."
Cro-"Okay coach, but whats di-di-dimin-..."
Coach-"the kicker moron, now get out there. Wave your hand if theyre breathing down your throat."
Cro- "Waves my hand if the other colors gonna bes down my throat like i did to that girl last..."
Coach-"god damn it Cro, how many times do i have to tell you to use that thing between your ears...get on the damn field before the play starts!"

You remember tebucky jones. His IQ was low enough to be considered legally ******ed. Doesn't take much between the ears to play defense.

 

[italia44]

Cromartie will be a difference-maker.. .................ready?............in the 2010 census.:bricks:

 

[Gunnails]

If Cromartie can't read then how is it that he was in trouble for tweeting on team property? I wonder what his tweets read like?

 

[efin98]

This hubbub to me sounds like an entirely different situation: it isn't that he can't read period, he probably has severe case of dyslexia or some other learning disorder that affects his ability to read and write at a normal pace.

 

[upstater1]

1. See the $16 million contribution figure under non program specific revenues? I'll give you one guess as to where 99% of that is headed. Most of the other schools in that database break contributions down by program (with almost all going to football) - FSU is trying to be sneaky by lumping it in their nonspecific category. Add that to football revenues, also add apparel, program, advertising, group licensing, and all other kinds of revenue and you might get a sense of the real number.

2. The market sets the rate.

3. What do you tell people that make less? They are not in possession of talents that can make their employer lots of money. The athletes are.

4. How do you define value? Some psychology professor that writes a bunch of "scholarly" articles that no one ever reads brings more "value" than a player that is part of team that brings more than $50M of revenues to the school per year (in the case of UF)?

My argument is that the market sets the rate. You think in a free market these kids make any money? Let them go play for the Worcester Gophers and we'll see how much money they make. All those contributions (not all for football) are made to the school by alumni. You actually think the boosters would make those otherwise?

As for Sociology professors, I gave you examples of teaching assistants who bring more money in than athletes. Let's do the math again. A teaching assistant gets much less money back than an athlete. But the teaching assistant teaches say 4 classes over 3 semesters. 40 students to a class. 160 students. Say tuition is $12k. That's $1.5k per class per student. 160 x $12k = $240k - expenses (stipend of about $10k for grad student). Now, if we take the $3 million loss from my previous example, add it to the $16 million in contributions, acknowledge that say $3 or 4 million came for other sports like baseball and basketball, then we have a $9 or $10 million profit. Divide that by 100 football players. That's $100,000 per athlete in value to the university. The school gives them $55k in education and clothing, and another $30k in football training. The rest of the profit goes back into the athletic program, and the school never sees it. Even with that $16 million in contributions, look at the ADs bottom line.

By the way, this idea that 100,000 people won't pay to see a professor is totally specious since the private research foundations at many public schools far exceed the total budget of athletic departments. They bring in hundreds of millions each year in revenues from private sources as well. Off the top of my head, I can name you people on my campus that are directly responsible for bringing in $50 million to my school. These people are very valuable, and they bring in hordes of cash that would make a football coach blush. And the truth is that market-wise they are even more rare than football coaches. But they are not remunerated like football coaches for a reason. The school is a non-profit institution, and most people that teach there are more interested in being allowed to conduct their passion freely than cashing in, not to mention the fact that R&D outside universities in this country is pretty scrimpy and limiting. I'm not saying these people are impoverished, they make great salaries.