Why College Sports is a Scam No. 101...

I don't decide it. I let them work it out. That has been one consistent point of the thread. But yes, I would say they would be paid differently based on their perceived value to the organization.

There were doomsday warnings when free agency hit pro sports too. I think they've gotten past it.

 

You can throw up all the arguments against paying the FB/BB players in college, but meanwhile, S&C coach at Iowa gets $595k/yr, the bowl "presidents" make over $1M/yr; the head coaches make in excess of $2M/yr; and the players get to be walking billboards for the team sponsor (who pays the coach) and need to scrounge to get $$ to drive, to visit home, to each something other than dorm food (even football dorm food gets old).

 

Please. You made 11 posts this morning on other subjects, including a few of your useless tweets.

And no, my proposal doesn't set a price for their work. The athletes would be free to cash in as much as possible from private means while also recognizing that they are still students who are participating in an extracurricular activity instead of being university employees subject to taxation on their school compensation ( i.e. Getting taxed on their scholarships), and while still complying with Title IX.

In other words, the private individuals and companies will do the schools' work for them in terms of paying the athletes' market rate.

 

To be fair, they do get more than the "cost of attendance."

Star QB tears ligaments in a pickup basketball game, and he's getting reconstructive surgery worth tens of thousands of dollars paid by someone else. Also, what would it cost to join an athletic club with state-of-the-art equipment and someone to coach you to reach your physical peak? Four years after you enroll, millions of people who didn't know you now do, including your future employers (the NFL). What's the price tag on that kind of exposure? Where else could they hope to get it?

 

The richest schools already have the advantages over the smaller schools. That's won't change.

Also, at least for bowl games, players do get, somewhat, a bonus valued in the few hundred dollars in terms of gifts from the bowls, such as video games, gift cards, electronic stuff, T-shirts (which the players usually roll their eyes at), etc. The concept of bowl gifts started happening back in the 60s when Syracuse players refused to play in a bowl game unless they got the same gift watches that the coaches received (as told in Dave Meggyesey's book).

Obviously not the same as what coaches get, and they really should get more. I also have always found it weird how the NCAA permitted it.

 

They aren't training you for your health. They're training you to be good for them. It's part of their cost of doing business.

So then ... how many athletes do you think we are talking about who get injured on campus playing a sport other than their own and require surgery? Sounds like a huge concern, eh.

 

And those advantages will only get bigger if they start offering high school players money to come to their school. They can already offer them the best facilities and prime-time TV exposure. Throw in a few grand or whatever just for making it to campus, I think the talent gap between the haves and the have nots gets way too big.

 

It's just another variable in the equation. They receive access to valuable "things" far above just being allowed to attend the university. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get what they can. But the "cost of a scholarship" example greatly understates what they receive, IMO.

 

There's only so many spots on the team. Would a star high school basketball player want to join a huge school for a few thousand only to sit on the bench? Probably not.

 

But drinking alcohol and doing the pot...

Guessing schools would put in some strict language about getting busted for underage drinking. Gotta make clear to these new, young employees that they have no time for some frivolous college pursuits like doing beer bongs or going to parties. They're there to work. Make 'em piss in a cup at 5 a.m. each morning to test for alcohol.

 

I was thinking more in terms of football, where there are more roster spots, but I get your point. On the other hand, the huge basketball programs aren't going to recruit and pay a kid that would likely just sit on the bench. And I doubt many of the top players coming out of high school think they are bench warmers anywhere. So I don't think your scenario would actually be an issue.

More likely, a big football program that regularly brings in 5-6 five-star guys might be able to convince 3-4 more five-star guys to come their way because they can pay them more than their smaller rival. Year after year, that starts to add up. And as those players lead the team to more titles, they school has more money to spend on similar five-star recruits.

 

So?