-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter CleveBucks
- Start date
[quote='BusNative;172061;1]
[/list]
Why should some student athletes - guys like Reggie Bush - be used to pay for the above or non-revenue sports? And while only getting the same benefit of the student athletes who cost the university (and state, sometimes) money?[/quote]
If you really want to see the end of college sports, SPECIFICALLY the non-revenue college sports, start paying football players.
It would take all of about 10 minutes for some young lawyer to (rightfully) challenge that under Title IX to say that the equal treatment of all athletes is not being practiced by the schools in question or something to that effect.
[/list]
Why should some student athletes - guys like Reggie Bush - be used to pay for the above or non-revenue sports? And while only getting the same benefit of the student athletes who cost the university (and state, sometimes) money?[/quote]
If you really want to see the end of college sports, SPECIFICALLY the non-revenue college sports, start paying football players.
It would take all of about 10 minutes for some young lawyer to (rightfully) challenge that under Title IX to say that the equal treatment of all athletes is not being practiced by the schools in question or something to that effect.
Upvote
0
You guys can make all the arguments you like about the value of a college education and all the other perks these kids get and that's fine. But please don't go over to the political forum and start professing how you believe in a free market.
The NCAA owns college football and controls the hundreds of millions it generates in revenue. That revenue is driven by the athletes, not the multimillion dollar coaches. The NCAA sets the wage and that wage is set at the value of a books and tuition and a little pocket change. It bears absolutely no resemblance to the market value of these players, and if it did we would have zero problem with boosters and their hundred dollar handshakes.
As a fan I love the system the way it works, and I don't really see it as any big moral issue because the kids are in fact doing just fine. But by the standard we apply in most other areas it is clear exploitation.
The NCAA owns college football and controls the hundreds of millions it generates in revenue. That revenue is driven by the athletes, not the multimillion dollar coaches. The NCAA sets the wage and that wage is set at the value of a books and tuition and a little pocket change. It bears absolutely no resemblance to the market value of these players, and if it did we would have zero problem with boosters and their hundred dollar handshakes.
As a fan I love the system the way it works, and I don't really see it as any big moral issue because the kids are in fact doing just fine. But by the standard we apply in most other areas it is clear exploitation.
Upvote
0
That wage is 5 years of professional training for a multi-million dollar contract, with competitive, exclusive internships at premiere entry level jobs.
It is exploitation, but it is a two way street. They are exploiting the system to gain admission & scholarships to schools that 99% of them would not earn otherwise (at least not at those schools).
Devin Gardner is exploiting the notion of being a student at an elite academic school like Michigan because he is good at earning UM money in his extra-curricular activities.
Upvote
0
Oh8ch;1720658; said:
I see your point but wonder about how it ties in to my understanding of college athletics. Don't college athletics operate at a loss at all but a handful of universities? Doesn't a college education give the average person about $1 million in increased earnings over a lifetime (link)? If coaches aren't delivering value, why are people here so upset about Tressel possibly leaving? After all, didn't Cooper attract equal or even better player talent?
In my opinion, take away the academic rationale and you turn college football into AAA baseball. No one is watching and nobody cares. The players have an important role in creating value but the system is what really creates the value, including the universities, conferences, sports administrators, coaches, and players but especially the fans.
Upvote
0
MaxBuck
SoCal, Baby!
[quote='BusNative;172061;1]Why should some student athletes - guys like Reggie Bush - be used to pay for the above or non-revenue sports? [/quote]Because that's the way the system has been structured.
No one put a gun to Bush's head and forced him to play college football. He took advantage of getting a free college education while being trained to make millions in the NFL, which sounds like an excellent financial deal for him.
No one put a gun to Bush's head and forced him to play college football. He took advantage of getting a free college education while being trained to make millions in the NFL, which sounds like an excellent financial deal for him.
Upvote
0
southcampus
Go Bucks
MaxBuck;1720707; said:
While I do agree that college FOOTBALL players are in a pretty good situation, I won't go as far as to say I "like" the system and how people can make such enormous amounts of money from college kids. That said, what Reggie Bush did was wrong and he's a dumbass.
Upvote
0
BayBuck
Buckeyes are best
Oh8ch;1720658; said:
Well, that is just obviously hyperbole, and the political analogies really aren't apt here. The free market is still very much at work in college athletics--obviously the value of tuition/housing/board/etc. varies greatly across the many universities offerings scholarships, programs can offer different levels of exposure to the pros, as well as the potential of national marketing opportunities for these players. A truly "free market" is a myth today, since of course some regulation of malfeasance is just an obvious part of life, but this is a system that is treating these kids fairly and providing greater opportunity for so many of them. In a free market, the football/basketball/baseball players would be earning minor-league salaries and all the other student-athletes would be paying their way through college.
Upvote
0
localyokel
Allergic to Kool-Aid
southcampus;1720710; said:
Yes, it is terribly inequitable in the way that those who labor for 3 or 4 years on the playing fields of universities are compensated with such a minute percentage of the profits those labors generate.
It would be so much more just if we would employ a model based on say, Walmart or Microsoft, all of whose workers in a temporary entry-level position* are routinely rewarded with a completely equal share of corporate profits.
*businessdictionary.com/definition
Entry Level Postition
Bottom-level employment in a firm which usually requires ordinary-level of education, training, and experience/qualifications. It gives a recruit the benefit of a gainful occupation, opportunity to learn and gain experience, and serves as a stepping-stone for higher-level jobs.
Upvote
0
Powair7s
Heisman
Student
Are we then going to pay the students working in labs who invent new technologies which the university patents and makes millions off of? No one is screaming these kids deserve anything and most of them are paying their own way through school.
One of the main problems with paying players would be certain schools could afford it while others it would hurt the university overall.
Are we then going to pay the students working in labs who invent new technologies which the university patents and makes millions off of? No one is screaming these kids deserve anything and most of them are paying their own way through school.
One of the main problems with paying players would be certain schools could afford it while others it would hurt the university overall.
Upvote
0
HINYG8
You never come back from Copperhead Road
I don't know if this was mentioned previous or not...but now the IRS is considering pursuing Bush for the tax value of the benefits he received while at USC that were not declared as income.
It amounts to approx 300K of value and the tax implications would be approx. 150K.
What I don't know is if the IRS does pursue it, and does take it forward to the point of depositions..Bush and perhaps Lake and Michaels would be 'on record' so more proof and information may become available to the NCAA.
It seems the NCAA has decided Reggie did in fact accept said benefits...so I don't know if there is any additional exposure/potential impact to USC if the IRS moves ahead.
IRS could chase Reggie Bush next | ProFootballTalk.com
It amounts to approx 300K of value and the tax implications would be approx. 150K.
What I don't know is if the IRS does pursue it, and does take it forward to the point of depositions..Bush and perhaps Lake and Michaels would be 'on record' so more proof and information may become available to the NCAA.
It seems the NCAA has decided Reggie did in fact accept said benefits...so I don't know if there is any additional exposure/potential impact to USC if the IRS moves ahead.
IRS could chase Reggie Bush next | ProFootballTalk.com
Upvote
0
kn1f3party
Hall of Fame
Oh8ch;1720658; said:
I'm with you on this, to some extent. Scholarships are handed out on the Division 1 and 2 levels, however. This argument only holds water when we're talking about programs that are bolstering enormous revenue and bring in the future talent we'll see in the NFL. Beyond the top half of FBS schools, you have hundreds of schools where this doesn't apply.
That being said, this is where I see the super conference business taking us. We're going to see a fraction in college athletics where those programs that bring in gobs of money become more akin to professional athletics. Hypothetical, but it could happen.
Upvote
0
Buckfan09;1720511; said:
Quoting the original for context...
Oh8ch;1720658; said:
I think the problem here is we're having the wrong argument.
I mean, what's really going on is that an NCAA member institution is being penalized for something that one of their athletes did that they agreed not to allow.
There is no hypocrisy in USC being punished by the NCAA for breaking the rules that it became a member and was obligated to enforce.
Bush, Carrol, Mayo, etc are largely out of the reach of the NCAA at this point...
Now, having said that, if there were a system in place to compensate players, we'd still probably have the problem with the "hundred dollar handshakes" because it likely wouldn't work that way.
Having said all that, there is a meritocracy at the end of the day. Reggie Bush did indeed end up making a boat load of money because of his "college education"-- think of it as his ability to set his market value. Whereas a lesser football player or say a women's volleyball player likely didn't make... well... Reggie Bush money.
As for the money he generated for USC vs non revenue sport athletes, I'm sure the title IX comments are mostly on point... as are the point that you don't make $ for what you do in class in college... you build your resume for that work... and... most kids do pay for that opportunity.
At any rate, I don't necessarily think it's fair... but... its certainly a pretty good deal for the vast majority of kids in these programs. The stars are the exception.
Upvote
0