1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

One for the little guys in Athletes v. NCAA

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by qtlaw, Mar 1, 2010.

  1. steveu

    steveu Well-Known Member

    And heaven forbid if someone gives you one penny -- and I mean ONE penny -- because if the NCAA finds out the athlete took one cent from someone, they'll come after the school's ass.

    About time the NCAA got some of its own medicine back. Just saying, that's all.
     
  2. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    It's not the same as actually sitting in class and learning from the professor. And not only that, but there have been plenty of times where coaches have pushed their players into certain majors that tend to be less demanding on time than others (i.e, Robert Smith and Ohio State).

    For the vast majority of college sports, the NCAA's ideal model is followed. But for football and men's basketball, and to a lesser extent women's hoops and baseball, it's become big business. People can argue that the revenue sports fund the lesser sports. Problem is, schools were funding these sports for decades before big-time money got involved.
     
  3. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Actually no they weren't.

    Go back just 35 years and look at how few women's programs there were.

    No soccer
    No hockey
    No lacrosse
    No softball
    Very little field hockey
    Very little basketball
    Very little volleyball

    With limited exceptions in women's hoops none of those sports pay for themselves and they never will.
     
  4. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    OK, but so what? Stealing and selling the publicity rights (The right of publicity is an individual's right to control and profit from the commercial use of his/her name, likeness and persona) of athletes doesn't seem like an equitable way to fund more sports programs.
     
  5. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    My point is schools were NOT funding these sports for decades. It's foolish to say that they were.
     
  6. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    Instead of expanding the "big time $$$" sports to chase more $$ so that we can "allegedly" fund more sports; how about consumers hold onto that money and the schools fund the sports with the taxes/fees collected? More direct approach.

    See we don't need to pay Rich Rodriguez $5M/year to pay for the wrestling program. We can do it better and cheaper.
     
  7. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    True on the women's sports. However, there are still plenty of schools in D-2 and D-3 that manage to fund men's and women's sports without needing to generate a ton of revenue through the football and men's basketball programs by exploiting their athletes' likenesses.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page