Larry on Twitter



Kentucky coach Mark Stoops said he has yet to talk to his players about the “All Players United” protest that players on three teams initiated last week in support of more financial assistant for players.

“We are going to talk about that. That was on my notes to talk about here before this game, and we will address it and we will talk about it as a team. Right now, I’m going to basically take the stance that I’m going to address it with our unity council, with our people and the leaders or our team, and if they’re all in favor of it 100 percent, then maybe we’ll do something. If not, then I prefer not to, not to let individual players express that. I’d rather do it as a team,” Stoops said Wednesday during the SEC teleconference.

Stoops is not against players getting money for the way schools use their likeness to generate revenue.

“Of course I would be in favor of giving the players money. I think it’s a very complex issue. I think it’s a lot harder to do than just say, ‘Do that,’ with the amateurism and the whole deal. Of course I’d like to give them money, but I know it really doesn’t matter what I think,” Stoops said. “And I think there’s a lot of issues involved in getting that done. So I think people that act like it’s no big deal and act like it’s just as easy as giving them some money I think are living in a different world. It’s not that easy.”

8 Responses to Stoops not opposed “All Players United” protest if team leaders are “in favor of it 100 percent”

  • Larry Pup says:

    This is a slippery slope. It had better be done right. I think paying players at the college level opens the door for bigger problems. They are already getting a free education. Maybe a monthly allowance of some sort would work if it is handled properly.

  • RJ says:

    1st a buck then 10. Next thing you know we’re out negotiating multi-year contracts with high school juniors. A blind man can see the harm done letting a 21 year old who has had no more than $20 in his pocket at one time lose with $10 Million right after signing with the pros. And we are expecting a 17 year old to be more mature than a 21 year old?!?

    In Europe, they don’t have collegiate scholarships. When a young “phenom” is discovered. He spends the 10 years before he his eighteenth birthday training for the pros then forgets about college. Is that we we want? Because paying collegiate players is the slippery slope to that end.

    The problem not that the player is not getting cash, it’s that collegiate football has become, not an amature sport, but a money making machine. You want to solved the problem? Limit how much money a school can make on TV revenue. Limit how much a school can charge for admission to games.

    We’re either going to end up a “professional” collegiate league or we are going to end up amatures. Right now we are half pregnent which is unsustainable. We had better think long and hard about paying amature players becasue they will not be amatures anymore!

    • D.H.Henry says:

      Absolutely not, don’t mess up a time honored system we know that works, is it possible that those who are for paying the athaletes do not know if we paid them to play it would be just a matter of time til the schools would loose control of their program altogether, the star players will always think they should have more money than the others, some will want contracts, (oh it will not start out that way) some coaches will go along with this to be popular with the players. No, I say give them a good education, all college expenses paid, but there is one thing that might be considered, and that is to give them a bonus for maintaining a certain grade level. this would assist those who don’t make it to a pro career

  • Todd Holder says:

    I used to think like the people in the earlier statements. However, I read a newspaper article from a WKU player who played in the 70′s. He was truly grateful for his scholarship. He did not think players should be paid to play, but his family was so truly poor they could not spare any money. He talked about going out with his fellow players and that he did not even have enough money to by a .25 cent coffee. He could not afford to buy any clothes and had to wear his football t-shirt and shorts everywhere. He truly could have used an allowance from the University. I think players should receive an allowance. A set amount of money or a charged University card, of a standard amount for every college player. I don’t know if it is $100.00 a week, a month, or more or less. But some of these scholarship players making the University millions, should at least have enough money to buy a donut or a t-shirt.

  • Dave Hopewell says:

    I see both sides on this and see there needs to be lots of thought put in this for sure.

    As a former student/athlete and out of state player who’s parents were gifted with love and caring but not a lot of $, I see and knew of the hardship it put on my parents to travel to our HOME games. I see and knew what it was like not to have any money in my pocket on some weekends for ME to eat let alone to do something extra. ($7/weekend for food & laundry $ and to eat at Duff’s Sunday Buffet was $4.00) I was willing to work anywhere I could pick up a dollar extra too but guess what, during school while on scholarship you can’t do that…under NCAA rules. My parents couldn’t stay with anybody either that was associated with UK because that was wrong too under NCAA rules. But guess what, they didn’t know anybody in KY that wasn’t associated with UK! So how does that work?

    So where is the line?

    If you saw all the little petty rules you’d be shocked. Like if you are a fan/booster and you want to pick up a couple of players who need a ride to church or home from the mall, technically you can’t do that. A coach can’t even do it! That my friend is crazy IMHO.

    I’m not talking contracts either just something for the extra work that comes with being a student athlete. There is so much more than getting a free “education”. I really don’t understand that remark and I don’t think anyone else would if you understood all the other petty rules there are concerning student athletes on full scholarship.

    Just stop and think, OK you are going to school and tuition, room and board and your meals are paid for and that’s it. What else will you need $ for? And oh by the way, while you are on full scholarship you can’t work for anyone during the school year (and by the way we want you in summer school too so you can work out and get better). Where does extra money for other expenses come from?

    Before you say a “free education” is enough think about other expenses ALL students have. It’s just that the “normal” student athlete has the same extra expenses the “normal” student has but doesn’t have the same opportunity to work or do something other students can do to make a extra $ on. Let alone have the time to do it while trying to be a real student too.

    I don’t have the answer for sure, I’m just saying there needs to be some changes.

    Please don’t shoot the messenger I just want you to think about the other side. Bleacher Report reported the value of a Texas football player being almost $600,000/year! They were #1 and Arkansas was #10 with the value of a football player there close to $400,000/ year. Those scholarships are valued at less that $50,000/year on the high side I’m told now. Folks they can add a little and changes the rules some I’d think.

    • Larry Pup says:

      Dave I was the one who made the free education comment. It is true is it not? I might add that the student athlete eats a lot better than the average student too via the training table. The average poor student has to pay for it all, room, board, books, meals, tuition, all. Some of their parents are poor too. I also said I was not opposed to some sort of a monthly allowance for a student athlete. I know what it is like to have no extra money in college. I was on a partial scholarship as a football manager, but not on the training table my freshmen year. I sure did not have much extra either. My parents had two in school at the same time back then. So I know what you are saying. I just think it must be handled right or it is going to be a train wreck. How do you regulate the allowance so every school is abiding by the same rule? I also agree with you that the petty rules the NCAA have must be changed to make it easier for student athletes.

  • Ron Hampton says:

    I think a simple monthy allowence would help these student atlethes. Give them a university card loaded with the allowence monthly. Anything more could mean trouble for college sports as we now know them.

  • DontBeNarrowMinded says:

    Some of you have a little understanding of what’s really going on & there is a lot of you who have no clue like “Larry pup”



