Earnest question: What if coaches' salaries were more on the level of other faculty employees (like professors), and the money made by the NCAA was funneled back to schools specifically earmarked for both scholarships (which most NCAA money that goes back to the schools is) and a general fund for teams lodging and travel to NCAA events?I agree with you 100% when we talk about "the whole idea of collegiate sports."
The rub comes when you look at all that money being made by the coaches and universities while the players are getting none of it. The system doesn't pass a simple smell test. All the while, players have, until recently, been restricted as to where they can choose to play because it might be unfair to the universities or make it hard for a coach to assemble a roster.
Letting the kids have free run at the candy counter at a gas station is OK, but the school cannot give each player $20 to get whatever they want.
Okay, that takes care of the NCAA money. Now, what about the money coming in from the fans and alumni? You'd just moving us back into the 60's and 70's and 80's.Earnest question: What if coaches' salaries were more on the level of other faculty employees (like professors), and the money made by the NCAA was funneled back to schools specifically earmarked for both scholarships (which most NCAA money that goes back to the schools is) and a general fund for teams lodging and travel to NCAA events?
Is the issue that the students' aren't getting paid or moreso that they aren't getting paid while other people are making bank off their sweat and blood (meanwhile pushing them to do what's in their best interest rather than the students)?
That'd go to facilities, scholarships and the stadium still. Pretty much everything on AI2020 would be allowed for instance.Okay, that takes care of the NCAA money. Now, what about the money coming in from the fans and alumni? You'd just moving us back into the 60's and 70's and 80's.
Money made by the NCAA already does get funneled back to schools specifically earmarked for scholarships and other athlete related things.Earnest question: What if coaches' salaries were more on the level of other faculty employees (like professors), and the money made by the NCAA was funneled back to schools specifically earmarked for both scholarships (which most NCAA money that goes back to the schools is) and a general fund for teams lodging and travel to NCAA events?
Is the issue that the students' aren't getting paid or moreso that they aren't getting paid while other people are making bank off their sweat and blood (meanwhile pushing them to do what's in their best interest rather than the students)?
Valid points especially Uga v wake forest analogy but I am sure the free market will figure it out like it does in every other industry. This isn’t the end of college sports especially in view of the billion dollar contracts. Allowing compensation without penalty will largely lead to the same results that we already see in college footballDo you pay ALL athletes money? Do you pay them all the same amount of money? If you pay them, do you still grant scholarships? Keep in mind the cost of a college education today. An out of state scholarship at GT is worth $50K a year. That is a LOT of money. A Vanderbilt student is getting closer to $75K a year. So they are already getting compensated very well. They also get additional benefits of tutoring and
The average income for Americans in 2019 was around 31K and the average salary was around 68K. So to say players don't get compensated is just not accurate. They are actually compensated well. If they take advantage of getting a free degree they are in a great position to get a job and have zero student debt, even if it takes them 5 years to get it.
If you start paying players how are Athletic associations supposed to cover the costs? How many AA in the country are able to break even now they have to add X cost per year to every scholarship athlete?
If you allow players to start making money off of their fame then it will only be the top few players on baketball, football, and a few baseball players maybe that are able to do that. And then the bigger fan bases have a huge advantage. How many uga fans would give money to QB1 on a twitch stream compared to Wake Forest's QB1?
Its Pandora's box and unnecessary.
It's naive to think that the top few players on basketball, football aren't already paying some of their players, but I digress.Do you pay ALL athletes money? Do you pay them all the same amount of money? If you pay them, do you still grant scholarships? Keep in mind the cost of a college education today. An out of state scholarship at GT is worth $50K a year. That is a LOT of money. A Vanderbilt student is getting closer to $75K a year. So they are already getting compensated very well. They also get additional benefits of tutoring and
The average income for Americans in 2019 was around 31K and the average salary was around 68K. So to say players don't get compensated is just not accurate. They are actually compensated well. If they take advantage of getting a free degree they are in a great position to get a job and have zero student debt, even if it takes them 5 years to get it.
If you start paying players how are Athletic associations supposed to cover the costs? How many AA in the country are able to break even now they have to add X cost per year to every scholarship athlete?
If you allow players to start making money off of their fame then it will only be the top few players on baketball, football, and a few baseball players maybe that are able to do that. And then the bigger fan bases have a huge advantage. How many uga fans would give money to QB1 on a twitch stream compared to Wake Forest's QB1?
Its Pandora's box and unnecessary.
Just like they did in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Facilities like Herschel Walker's camero?That'd go to facilities, scholarships and the stadium still. Pretty much everything on AI2020 would be allowed for instance.
Just get on with it. What's your point?Just like they did in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Facilities like Herschel Walker's camero?
My point is cheaters are going to cheat. Don't be so naive.Just get on with it. What's your point?
LOL. Quoting my earlier post...My point is cheaters are going to cheat. Don't be so naive.
You're right that cheaters are going to cheat. Paying players under the table is still going to happen as it is today and will still be banned/illegal (depending on context) then as it is now.It's naive to think that the top few players on basketball, football aren't already paying some of their players, but I digress.
Would companies in Atlanta benefit more from a GT player advertising for them, or one from a rural school about 60 miles away? CGC and GT athletics are trying to take control of the city of Atlanta, but it is much easier to purchase mutt merchandise in Atlanta than GT merchandise. The only place I see GT merchandise and people wearing GT gear is in Midtown. Everywhere else, and especially if you go out to the suburbs, you see a lot more people in mutt stuff and it is difficult to find GT merchandise.For instance, most factory schools are rural institutions. But a program like GT is within an urban setting where there is a concentration of capital. Would an Atlanta company benefit more from representation of a local sports star rather than one from out of town? In such a market, it will not be about the schools but about the individual players and individual stars will want to be brought home to where the capital lives.