LINCOLN, NEB. ? In this football-crazed state that has no professional team and only one Division One program, the Nebraska Cornhuskers are big business.

Riding a 40-year home sellout streak, the Huskers’ football team turns a profit of about $16 million annually.

Football is the meal ticket for the university’s 23-sport athletic department, and one state lawmaker wants the players to get a cut.

State Sen. Ernie Chambers, who has been pushing the issue since the 1980s, introduced legislation that would require Nebraska’s football players to get a stipend if three of the six other states with schools in the Big 12 Conference pass similar laws.

The Nebraska Legislature approved Chambers’ idea in 1988, but it was vetoed by then-Gov. Kay Orr.

The latest attempt is receiving a lot more attention because Gov. Mike Johanns promised to sign the bill into law if it reaches his desk.

“People are becoming aware of the huge television contracts the NCAA is making, and they’re aware of how players are not being treated fairly,” Chambers said.

Coach Frank Solich supports the idea, as long as it won’t get his team into trouble with the NCAA. A lawmaker in Texas also has followed Chambers’ lead, offering up a similar proposal in his state’s legislature this past week.

College coaches and athletic directors across the country are divided over whether student-athletes deserve more than a free education and room and board. However, most agree that the proposal in Nebraska isn’t the way to address real or perceived financial hardships among athletes.

“The heart is in the right place, but it would impossible to do this,” Arkansas athletic director Frank Broyles said.

Paying only football players would invite legal action from athletes in other sports — not to mention shake the foundation of the NCAA’s amateurism rules, athletic officials said.

If Nebraska’s players were paid, they would violate the extra-benefits rule and, thus, be ineligible, NCAA spokesman Wally Renfro said.

Chambers contends that the school’s football players are exploited because they help generate millions of dollars.

Athletic directors point out that even though football brings in large sums of money at Nebraska and other major-college programs, those dollars support the schools’ other sports — most of which don’t generate money.

Chambers said he introduced the legislation to put pressure on the NCAA to liberalize its rules governing financial assistance to players.

The NCAA doesn’t need the prodding, Renfro said.

“There’s been a movement for years to narrow the gap between the full cost of enrollment and the full cost of attendance,” Renfro said.

In 1991, the NCAA set up a special fund for low-income athletes, and this year another fund was established to help student-athletes pay for educational costs not covered by their scholarships. Athletes from low-income families also can receive federal Pell Grants.

The NCAA allows athletes to work, when their sport is not in season, and earn up to $2,000 per academic year. There is no cap on earnings during vacations.

College athletes already are better off than many classmates, said Peter Roby, director for Northeastern University’s Center for the Study of Sport in Society.

“They travel first-class, they eat as much as they want and, on top of that, they’re given a free education,” Roby said.

Kansas State athletic director Tim Weiser said the proposal in Nebraska misses the point.

“I can’t imagine something more valuable to one’s ability to earn income and be productive than to have a college education,” Weiser said.

However, Arizona athletic director Jim Livengood said the NCAA should do more for athletes from low-income homes.

“We need to think outside the box,” he said, “and find an equitable way to distribute more financial aid to the needy kids.”

Athletic directors DeLoss Dodds of Texas and Rick Bay of San Diego State said college athletes who want money for playing a sport should consider turning pro.

The idea of paying players apparently doesn’t have a lot of public support. In a USA Today/CNN Gallup poll published Friday, 72 percent of the 1,003 people surveyed said college athletes should not be paid beyond the cost of scholarships.

Lawmakers most likely will debate and vote on Chambers’ plan before adjourning in early June.

While the idea is tossed around, the Nebraska athletic department remains neutral.

“We’ve taken the position that we belong to a voluntary organization that has rules prohibiting the kinds of payments outlined in the language of the bill,” athletic director Steve Pederson said.

Solich said he’s in favor of giving back to his players because their talents benefit the athletic department, the university and the state.

“Having said that,” Solich said, “anything we do to assist our players must be permissible according to NCAA rules.”

Iowa State basketball coach Larry Eustachy has said he would contribute some of his own salary to paying his players, if it were allowed. He said some of his players don’t get enough money to eat properly.

Football coaches Larry Blakeny of Troy State and Randy Edsall of Connecticut would favor paying a small stipend to players, perhaps $50 or $100 a month. While Chambers’ bill does not specify an amount, the proposal in Texas would give up to $200 a month.

Edsall said a few of his players’ families are in such dire financial situations that the athletes send Pell Grant checks home, leaving them short of money at school.

“As much as I would like to see kids get a stipend,” Edsall said, “it’s not realistic to think it would happen. It would open a can of worms.”

Full athletic scholarships cover room, board, tuition, books and fees. NCAA research shows it costs an additional $2,000 a year to cover other costs that student-athletes could expect. In many cases, Renfro said, those are paid by student-athletes’ families.

Low-income athletes can get as much as $4,000 a year in Pell Grant payments.

Pell-eligible student-athletes also can apply for money through the NCAA’s Special Assistance Fund. The NCAA earmarks $10 million a year for the fund, which provides money for uninsured medical and dental care, costs associated with student or family emergencies, school supplies, clothing and other essential expenses.

“It rarely is used all up,” Renfro said of the yearly funding, “which shows the need isn’t as great as some people would have you believe.”

The NCAA also set aside $17 million this year for a new Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund, which will increase 13 percent annually for 11 years. The fund has no financial-need restrictions and covers costs of educational and developmental opportunities.

Both funds are stocked with cash from the NCAA’s $6 billion TV contract with CBS that runs through 2014.

If player stipends were ever allowed by the NCAA, Renfro said they would have to be paid to athletes in every sport.

With only 40 of 1,264 NCAA-member athletic departments turning a profit, most budgets could not afford even modest stipends, Renfro said.

Carried out to the extreme, Renfro said, the results of paying stipends would be disastrous for athletic programs.

If all 361,175 NCAA athletes were paid even $2,000 a year, it would amount to more than $722 million annually.

If the NCAA used all its proceeds from the CBS contract to pay student-athletes, it would be about $2 billion short, Renfro said.

“It doesn’t work,” he said.