The Grand Issue with the NCAA


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby captainj » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:57 am

The Grand Issue with the NCAA: http://tinyurl.com/n78bmls
captainj
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:55 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby DJG » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:20 am

When college football goes to a playoff system next year, the scandals surrounding football will start to reach critical mass and something will have to be done, inevitably.

The $2000 stipend being discussed is just the first step.

If the players themselves join forces and take a stand the business of college football will find its bubble is about to pop.

The formation of these super conferences will accelerate the whole process, IMO.
DJG
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:33 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:26 am

Pay-for-play is now inevitable; we're just waiting for the details to be worked out. I agree that it will precipitate the demise of the NCAA as we now know it, but that's probably a good thing. The sea-change will be great.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby aaronk » Fri Sep 13, 2013 10:12 am

Marlow wrote:Pay-for-play is now inevitable; we're just waiting for the details to be worked out. I agree that it will precipitate the demise of the NCAA as we now know it, but that's probably a good thing. The sea-change will be great.


Would "pay for play" extend to professionals in T&F??
If it does, that means that people can go pro just out of high school, and earn their living while racing in collegiate dual meets!! :D
aaronk
 
Posts: 3351
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:14 am

aaronk wrote:
Marlow wrote:Pay-for-play is now inevitable; we're just waiting for the details to be worked out. I agree that it will precipitate the demise of the NCAA as we now know it, but that's probably a good thing. The sea-change will be great.


Would "pay for play" extend to professionals in T&F??
If it does, that means that people can go pro just out of high school, and earn their living while racing in collegiate dual meets!! :D


Pay for play refers to schools paying athletes in team sports (I don't believe it refers to 3rd party endorsement type deals). An Olympic Sports model would have to be quite different, as there is no real rationale to be paying any T&F/CC athletes.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby skyin' brian » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:21 am

Other than men's football and men's basketball, are there any other sports that would be worthy of pay?

I doubt it.
skyin' brian
 
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Dixon » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:49 am

You don't pay college athetes

Without college sports these athletes have no platform to showcase their skills/talent and nobody has to play college sports. If they are all worried about $$$ at the college level get a job.

A scholarship and a place to show off is very fair.
Dixon
 
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:35 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 18.99s » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:52 pm

skyin' brian wrote:Other than men's football and men's basketball, are there any other sports that would be worthy of pay?

I doubt it.


Even with football and basketball, most teams are money-losing operations, and have to be subsidized by tuition dollars (and/or other fees paid by students).
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:01 pm

18.99s wrote:
skyin' brian wrote:Other than men's football and men's basketball, are there any other sports that would be worthy of pay?

I doubt it.


Even with football and basketball, most teams are money-losing operations, and have to be subsidized by tuition dollars (and/or other fees paid by students).


I imagine pretty much every "minor" sports program at every school is an overall money loser with maybe the exception of a UConn or Tennessee women's basketball.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby JumboElliott » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:07 pm

Dixon wrote:You don't pay college athetes

Without college sports these athletes have no platform to showcase their skills/talent and nobody has to play college sports. If they are all worried about $$$ at the college level get a job.

A scholarship and a place to show off is very fair.

This.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:26 pm

JumboElliott wrote:
Dixon wrote:You don't pay college athetes

Without college sports these athletes have no platform to showcase their skills/talent and nobody has to play college sports. If they are all worried about $$$ at the college level get a job.

A scholarship and a place to show off is very fair.

This.


"This" is a very simplistic attitude when you consider how perverted the concept of collegiate athletics has become in so many ways. Applying 1960s attitudes (that were naive even then) to the multi-billion dollar endeavor the highest levels of collegiate basketball and football have become doesn't make sense.

And the idea of "if you don't like it, go elsewhere" is rarely an option. No feeder system exists for the NFL outside of college football, and the options for basketball players are not much better. Coupled with the age restrictions imposed by both the NFL and NBA, and anyone looking at it objectively would say that the NCAA's monopoly and arbitrarily applied rules could use some revision.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 18.99s » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:17 pm

If they're going to pay football and basketball players above tuition and room and board, they should create a separate NCAA division for that, and require certain levels of profitability for membership in that division.

And there needs to be a cap on the salaries of college coaches. If a coach wants to make a million bucks, go to the NBA or NFL just like the players would have to do.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Mighty Favog » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:27 pm

If the money comes from the university, dollars would have to be paid to male and fenale athletes proportional to the overall male/female student body ratio.
Mighty Favog
 
Posts: 1786
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby JumboElliott » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:41 pm

And THAT is why it is unfeasible.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:01 pm

Mighty Favog wrote:If the money comes from the university, dollars would have to be paid to male and female athletes proportional to the overall male/female student body ratio.


This is my question also, but they seem to be saying that it is not a show stopper. I would like to have someone give a detailed explanation of that point of view; no one ever does, especially those pushing, which seems to be the ESPN/SI types.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16320
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Fri Sep 13, 2013 9:54 pm

Mighty Favog wrote:If the money comes from the university, dollars would have to be paid to male and fenale athletes proportional to the overall male/female student body ratio.


If we're talking stipends, yes that's something to resolve (how about it coming from the NCAA?). But much of the concern is about the NCAA's blatant use of people's names/images to make money (in perpetuity), and it's treatment of any athlete remotely doing the same as a cardinal sin.

Not responding to MF here, but much of the hemming and hawing seems to be based around the thought that giving players stipends and/or loosening rules around people making money on their own names would somehow make college sports about money, as if that horse didn't leave the stable years and years ago.

I have no problem with coaches making tons of money. It seems absurd, but it's fans and administrations enabling this ludicrous machine that are to blame.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby James Fields » Sat Sep 14, 2013 1:58 am

For extended discussion of paying college athletes see the front cover and 7-page article inside TIME magazine current issue (received on 9 September 2013).
James Fields
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Knoxville and Seattle

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 18.99s » Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:46 am

KevinM wrote:I have no problem with coaches making tons of money. It seems absurd, but it's fans and administrations enabling this ludicrous machine that are to blame.


My problem with coaches making tons of money is that the players don't. There wouldn't be so much money available to coaches if the NCAA didn't have strict rules against paying players.

Create an elite NCAA division where both the coaches and players can be paid big bucks, with the other 80% or so restricting pay for both coaches and players.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby gm » Sat Sep 14, 2013 8:52 am

18.99s wrote:Create an elite NCAA division where both the coaches and players can be paid big bucks, with the other 80% or so restricting pay for both coaches and players.


No, let the NFL pay for its own development system and keep the huge number of ill-equipped "student-athletes" out of the universities.
gm
 
Posts: 4559
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: "What's the pre-cooked weight on that lab?"

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby JumboElliott » Sat Sep 14, 2013 10:59 am

Thank you. Same with the NBA.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby DrJay » Sat Sep 14, 2013 11:29 am

Good five part story on money, academic cheating, drugs, and sex at OK St football in Sports Illustrated, part 1 in the mag this week, parts 2-4 online, part 5 in next week's mag. Could substitute most good NCAA DI schools for OK St, I reckon. What a farce. I enjoy a good football game, but frankly at this point, don't really care what happens to NCAA football.
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Sep 14, 2013 11:40 am

I don't understand how the schools will get around the demand for women to be paid at the same ratio from a legal standpoint.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Sat Sep 14, 2013 11:46 am

gm wrote:
18.99s wrote:Create an elite NCAA division where both the coaches and players can be paid big bucks, with the other 80% or so restricting pay for both coaches and players.


No, let the NFL pay for its own development system and keep the huge number of ill-equipped "student-athletes" out of the universities.


That would be fine, but at the same time let's start forcing the schools to own up to the shameful ways that they have abandoned their missions to educate and prepare young adults for the future.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:05 pm

DrJay wrote:Good five part story on money, academic cheating, drugs, and sex at OK St football in Sports Illustrated, part 1 in the mag this week, parts 2-4 online, part 5 in next week's mag. Could substitute most good NCAA DI schools for OK St, I reckon. What a farce. I enjoy a good football game, but frankly at this point, don't really care what happens to NCAA football.


I don't think anyone denies that the things that are described in that story happen all over college football, but the credibility of the SI story itself is being ripped apart in several places. Check out the deadspin coverage of the issues with the story.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 18.99s » Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:46 pm

gm wrote:
18.99s wrote:Create an elite NCAA division where both the coaches and players can be paid big bucks, with the other 80% or so restricting pay for both coaches and players.


No, let the NFL pay for its own development system and keep the huge number of ill-equipped "student-athletes" out of the universities.


Whether the NFL wants to pay for it, or the colleges can pay for it purely from sports revenue, either way is fine with me. Just separate it from the regular NCAA divisions.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby JumboElliott » Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:53 pm

DrJay wrote:Good five part story on money, academic cheating, drugs, and sex at OK St football in Sports Illustrated, part 1 in the mag this week, parts 2-4 online, part 5 in next week's mag. Could substitute most good NCAA DI schools for OK St, I reckon. What a farce. I enjoy a good football game, but frankly at this point, don't really care what happens to NCAA football.

College football and to a lesser extent, basketball are societal cancers and they bring out just about everything that is bad about humanity.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby kamikaze7 » Tue Sep 17, 2013 7:45 am

I read the time magazine article 2 weeks ago. It suggested paying football and basketball players amounts as high as $30,000 a year. I had to laugh because there are so many things wrong with that thought process.

For starters, if you think the graduation rate among athletes is bad now, wait until they are being paid $30,000 a year. With such payments, a significant number of them will completely loose focus of the real reason they are in college.

Secondly, lawsuits will ensue if you pay football $30,000 and do not pay softball players. There will be claims of gender discrimination. And I am not sure such payments would comply with title IX

And if colleges have to pay money to students in non income generating sports, then college sports as we know it could be ending. Most colleges simply cannot afford that.

Such a scenario will also create a ludicrous scenario where high school prospects hire agents to negotiate their payment.

There will be a huge disparity between how much players are paid. if Johnny Manziel is getting paid $30,000 and his center is getting paid a measly $3000, that resentment could cause said center to miss a few blocks and Manziel will be leveled by a menacing linebacker.

My take is that college athletes already get enough benefits. I agree that schools should not use the likeness of a player in video games after said player is no longer a student athlete. But this idea that schools exploit players does not wash. Most student athletes get a lot more from the school than they give it. At schools like Notre Dame for example many students graduate with student debt around $50,000. Meanwhile an obscure no-name offensive tackle goes to school free, gets free meals and all kinds of perks, networking opportunities, meets all kinds of girls, gets extra tutoring............................
kamikaze7
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:05 pm

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby booond » Tue Sep 17, 2013 9:59 am

kamikaze7 wrote:My take is that college athletes already get enough benefits. I agree that schools should not use the likeness of a player in video games after said player is no longer a student athlete. But this idea that schools exploit players does not wash. Most student athletes get a lot more from the school than they give it. At schools like Notre Dame for example many students graduate with student debt around $50,000. Meanwhile an obscure no-name offensive tackle goes to school free, gets free meals and all kinds of perks, networking opportunities, meets all kinds of girls, gets extra tutoring............................


You could've skipped all the strawmen and gone to the money quote. It's on the backs of those obscure offensive linemen that has propelled Notre Dame to its fame. There'd be no huge campus, no touchdown jesus, no contract with NBC and no billions without those obscure linemen who in return get a potential education. My guess is if given the choice of the billions or paying a few pennies for the obscure linemen they'll pay.
booond
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:25 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby kamikaze7 » Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:36 pm

booond wrote:
kamikaze7 wrote:My take is that college athletes already get enough benefits. I agree that schools should not use the likeness of a player in video games after said player is no longer a student athlete. But this idea that schools exploit players does not wash. Most student athletes get a lot more from the school than they give it. At schools like Notre Dame for example many students graduate with student debt around $50,000. Meanwhile an obscure no-name offensive tackle goes to school free, gets free meals and all kinds of perks, networking opportunities, meets all kinds of girls, gets extra tutoring............................


You could've skipped all the strawmen and gone to the money quote. It's on the backs of those obscure offensive linemen that has propelled Notre Dame to its fame. There'd be no huge campus, no touchdown jesus, no contract with NBC and no billions without those obscure linemen who in return get a potential education. My guess is if given the choice of the billions or paying a few pennies for the obscure linemen they'll pay.


Because you have no valid responses to my points you call them strawman arguments. :)
ND football can exist and thrive with or without most of those players. The notion that an individual player or player(s) is responsible for the billions Notre Dame makes is ludicrous. Players are simply replaceable parts. Very few players are a brand unto themselves. People tune in to watch schools. Rarely is an individual player such as draw that people will tune in just to watch him.

The brand name of ND and its alumni network are mostly responsible for the billions ND makes. The idea that an ND offensive tackle is responsible for the NBC contract or the huge campus is laughable at best. If ND had to depend on its players who are not that good, the best they could get is a local TV contract. You can forget an NBC contract. Clearly alumni connections are what makes ND thrive. I cannot remember the last time ND had marquee player who can draw TV audiences on his own.

Without the alumni networks, few college programs could actually make money. These ND players should be thankful that they go to school free while their classmates will graduate with $50,000 in student debt while others work 2 jobs to make ends meet.
And those from big conference schools should even be more thankful: In addition to getting free tuition and other perks, they are given under the table money amounting to thousands per game.
kamikaze7
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:05 pm

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby booond » Tue Sep 17, 2013 1:57 pm

If Notre Dame suddenly strung up a succession of 4-7 seasons, viewers would stop watching, ad revenues would dry up, NBC would walk away and the University would fire coaches and ADs. It would take a long time for it to hurt the bottom line but there is no doubt that Notre Dame's reputation was built on the backs of offensive linemen and if those offensive linemen went away so would some of the reputation Notre Dame's built.
booond
 
Posts: 572
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:25 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby 18.99s » Tue Sep 17, 2013 5:31 pm

kamikaze7 wrote:I read the time magazine article 2 weeks ago. It suggested paying football and basketball players amounts as high as $30,000 a year. I had to laugh because there are so many things wrong with that thought process.

For starters, if you think the graduation rate among athletes is bad now, wait until they are being paid $30,000 a year. With such payments, a significant number of them will completely loose focus of the real reason they are in college.


If they're going to be paid a salary like that, the scholarships would have to be handled differently. Give each player 5 years tuition and room & board, but let them choose how and when to use it (subject to a time limit like 10 years). So they can start studying entirely after their 4 years of playing are done, or study part-time or full-time while playing in order to graduate sooner. That probably would result in higher graduation rates than the current system, at least among those who don't go to the NFL or NBA.
18.99s
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:28 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby kamikaze7 » Wed Sep 18, 2013 4:10 am

booond wrote:If Notre Dame suddenly strung up a succession of 4-7 seasons, viewers would stop watching, ad revenues would dry up, NBC would walk away and the University would fire coaches and ADs. It would take a long time for it to hurt the bottom line but there is no doubt that Notre Dame's reputation was built on the backs of offensive linemen and if those offensive linemen went away so would some of the reputation Notre Dame's built.


First off you are mistaken if you think the NBC contract is exists because of how the players perform. If such contracts were based on performance, ND would never have such a lucrative contract. The school has never won a national championship in decades. The last time they won, almost none of the current ND students had been born including the grad students. ND got that contract again because of their alumni network and their brand name. The alumni happen to have strong connections in the right places.

Secondly the strong alumni network will not allow Notre Dame to have successive 4-7 seasons. The reason ND can recruit decent players and have excellent facilities is precisely because of their alumni network donates big money and gets the school lucrative contracts.

Notre Dame thrives financially because its brand name is valuable and because of its extremely strong alumni network. Players come and go. Players are replaceable. If the current group of players do not want to play anymore, ND will simply recruit others.

ND also thrives because they are polarizing. They have a huge loyal fan base all over the country who wants to see them win. But there are also a huge number of fans out there who want to watch them loose. That makes for compelling TV.

The players did not build the loyal fan base. Most fans have been ND supporters long before these players were born.
The players did not make ND polarizing. ND has been hated and loved in equal measure for decades.
The players did not build the ND brand name. The players did not create the NBC contract by their performance. In fact the players benefit by appearing on TV more often than if they went to other schools.

And most importantly : People do not pay hefty prices for tickets or watch ND because of any individual player. They do because they feel a sense of loyalty to the school.
kamikaze7
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:05 pm

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Marlow » Wed Sep 18, 2013 5:12 am

kamikaze7 wrote:First off you are mistaken if you think the NBC contract is exists because of how the players perform.

I would like to contradict your contradiction. The Notre Dame contract exists because of the EXPECTATION of a successful ND campaign. Hope springs eternal in the Irish breast. Every year they rate highly in the recruiting wars, and the ND faithful are thinking THIS is the year of our resurrection. If ND football truly fell into the wasteheap of history, the contract would be severely devalued. But, as you DO point out, that is unlikely to happen, given the nature of their Booster Nation.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21088
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby athleticshushmail » Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:19 am

In my opinion, college students should not be paid to play children's games. It sends the wrong message. College students are not paid to go to class, they should not be paid to go to a football field. It's sending the message that the football field is more important than the classroom.
athleticshushmail
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:22 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:01 pm

athleticshushmail wrote:In my opinion, college students should not be paid to play children's games. It sends the wrong message. College students are not paid to go to class, they should not be paid to go to a football field. It's sending the message that the football field is more important than the classroom.


That's a fine premise and deserves some consideration. However, the reality is that right now we have a system where the only people involved with college football and basketball whose sports-related income is limited are the athletes themselves. Schools, coaches, administrators, endowments, vendors, networks, etc., are all pulling in money according to the whims of the market while players are given sermons about the virtue of "amateur" eligibility.

Since we're track fans, it also is worth mentioning that all other sports (including XC/T&F) are dependent on the department's football and basketball-generated revenue (including donor money no doubt spurred by the big 2 sports, and Conference or NCAA TV money). Take away the non-revenue sports and the number of schools that make money on athletics would change dramatically, I imagine.
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby gm » Wed Sep 18, 2013 2:51 pm

KevinM wrote:Since we're track fans, it also is worth mentioning that all other sports (including XC/T&F) are dependent on the department's football and basketball-generated revenue (including donor money no doubt spurred by the big 2 sports, and Conference or NCAA TV money).


Not quite.
gm
 
Posts: 4559
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: "What's the pre-cooked weight on that lab?"

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Wed Sep 18, 2013 7:41 pm

gm wrote:
KevinM wrote:Since we're track fans, it also is worth mentioning that all other sports (including XC/T&F) are dependent on the department's football and basketball-generated revenue (including donor money no doubt spurred by the big 2 sports, and Conference or NCAA TV money).


Not quite.


Care to elaborate?
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby Daisy » Wed Sep 18, 2013 7:45 pm

18.99s wrote:
kamikaze7 wrote:I read the time magazine article 2 weeks ago. It suggested paying football and basketball players amounts as high as $30,000 a year. I had to laugh because there are so many things wrong with that thought process.

For starters, if you think the graduation rate among athletes is bad now, wait until they are being paid $30,000 a year. With such payments, a significant number of them will completely loose focus of the real reason they are in college.


If they're going to be paid a salary like that, the scholarships would have to be handled differently. Give each player 5 years tuition and room & board, but let them choose how and when to use it (subject to a time limit like 10 years). So they can start studying entirely after their 4 years of playing are done, or study part-time or full-time while playing in order to graduate sooner. That probably would result in higher graduation rates than the current system, at least among those who don't go to the NFL or NBA.

I've always thought that this is the way to go. The reality of student sport at this level is that there is no time to study. So they are not getting the supposed education that is advertised.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby gm » Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:00 pm

KevinM wrote:
gm wrote:
KevinM wrote:Since we're track fans, it also is worth mentioning that all other sports (including XC/T&F) are dependent on the department's football and basketball-generated revenue (including donor money no doubt spurred by the big 2 sports, and Conference or NCAA TV money).


Not quite.


Care to elaborate?


You're painting with a very broad brush and it's just not true at a lot of NCAA D1 institutions. The budgets for "all other sports" are absolutely NOT dependent on football or basketball revenue. In many cases, student athletic fees pay the bills.
gm
 
Posts: 4559
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: "What's the pre-cooked weight on that lab?"

Re: The Grand Issue with the NCAA

Postby KevinM » Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:20 pm

gm wrote:
KevinM wrote:
gm wrote:
KevinM wrote:Since we're track fans, it also is worth mentioning that all other sports (including XC/T&F) are dependent on the department's football and basketball-generated revenue (including donor money no doubt spurred by the big 2 sports, and Conference or NCAA TV money).


Not quite.


Care to elaborate?


You're painting with a very broad brush and it's just not true at a lot of NCAA D1 institutions. The budgets for "all other sports" are absolutely NOT dependent on football or basketball revenue. In many cases, student athletic fees pay the bills.


You're right, of course, and I should have mentioned that (and I question whether even that should be necessary given the rising costs of college educations).
KevinM
 
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], booond, derby_county, JumboElliott, lpd, Master Po, mt, Tuariki and 11 guests