Do you think the NCAA will be able to keep this business model up forever?
- Thread starter CrimsonTider
- Start date
Yea breh Im tryna find the it so I can link it but I cant find it right now smh
Naw...college players are the product in multi-billion dollar machine. They arent simply workers on the periphery of the company. If you think of it like an oil company, the players arent the workers --- they're the gasoline.
Something will have to be done to monetarily compensate the players. Too much money is being generated here. Its Un-American.
Are you fcking retarded?
tremonthustler1
aka bx_representer
It's a billion dollar machine where not every school eats.
Where does the money come from to compensate everyone (and by everyone I mean, even the New Jersey Institute of Technology players gotta get money)?
If compensation is solely all you're looking for, there are alternatives that have nothing to do with college.
The NCAA is signing billion dollar television deals. That money is going somewhere...They can figure it out.
The NJIT type schools are not being featured on CBS/ESPN etc...for the schools that regularly are, some type of compensatory package must be made available to the students. Again, this is immoral for a country that operates under the free-market, capitalist ideal to operate in the way the NCAA does.
BlvdBrawler
Superstar
What about those who play in sports that aren't shown on those TV networks? What about the diving team or the women's lacrosse team? What about Division 2 or Division 3 schools? We paying them too?
The problem here is not the model, the problem is that we magnify our experiences with the top 1/10 of 1% of student athletes (the draft picks) and base all of our opinions on them.
Again, there are tens of thousands of student-athletes who *are* in it for the education, for whom playing a sport is more than worth it. If it weren't they wouldn't do it.
To summarize... there are 3 ways to pay for college.
1. Pay for it yourself (parents etc).
2. Get student loans
3. Get a scholarship or several scholarships
0% of the people in categories 1 and 2 would have a problem being in category 3, so why are ya'll trying to
for these kids?
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
lets be reality about this.
Those programs a) do not create the same revenue b) a large chunk of those kids can afford college as they are affluent sports. c) We know this to be true because a lot of those sports offer only partial to no scholarships.
BlvdBrawler
Superstar
Agreed that they don't generate the same revenue, so they don't deserve scholarships? Is that what you're inferring or...?
Sounds like (correct me if I'm wrong) your problem is not with the model, but just the fact that the schools make money off the sports.
tremonthustler1
aka bx_representer
like I said though, not every school eats. For as capitalistic as you feel the NCAA is, it's actually communist in its ideals where everything is divvied up the same and there's no one over the other (whether we care to agree with that or not). There's no realistic way to pay every student in every league in every sport. All you can provide is a college scholarship that can be worth as much as $200K
It fragments everything outside and inside. Nevermind the notion of amateur athletics that the NCAA wants to abide by, (that opens up a major can of worms that would corrupt every sport in college athletics) which shuts everything down even for schools that just don't need to deal with the financial aspect of it or don't benefit from it.
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
I think they all deserve scholarships, but if those kids are not getting any I am not sure I should feel that bad for them.
And I do not like colleges making money off sports, but that has already gone too far over the cliff.
thats not true at all. The biggest revenue producer is the BCS, and that money mostly goes to BCS conference schools.
What about those who play in sports that aren't shown on those TV networks? What about the diving team or the women's lacrosse team? What about Division 2 or Division 3 schools? We paying them too?
The problem here is not the model, the problem is that we magnify our experiences with the top 1/10 of 1% of student athletes (the draft picks) and base all of our opinions on them.
Again, there are tens of thousands of student-athletes who *are* in it for the education, for whom playing a sport is more than worth it. If it weren't they wouldn't do it.
To summarize... there are 3 ways to pay for college.
1. Pay for it yourself (parents etc).
2. Get student loans
3. Get a scholarship or several scholarships
0% of the people in categories 1 and 2 would have a problem being in category 3, so why are ya'll trying to
I really dont understand your argument here. These "kids" as you call them are directly responsible for billions of dollars in revenue generated. They must be compensated appropriately.
Why are you trying to equalize every student athlete, and house them under one umbrella? Is the lacrosse coach bringing in the same salary as John Caliperi? Is the diving coach bringing in the same salary as Coach K? The same sliding scale applies to the athletes. Like any other private sector operation, the market dictates compensation...there is no market for those sports, or for teams, players or schools on the margins. There is a market for big name schools and players --- and for those participants, compensation is a must.
I didnt make the rules of capitalism. You cant hold students to an archaic system anymore. Its simply immoral.
@tremonthustler1 ...my response pretty much satisfies both quotes. Dont wanna repeat myself.
Last edited by a moderator:
BlvdBrawler
Superstar
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
you cant earn money and goto school? wheredeydothatat?
tremonthustler1
aka bx_representer
So if a program isn't bringing in money, should they bill the players?
The funny thing is that there's a market for what they do and other than football, an alternative league that will pay you. You can't hold students to an archaic system, correct, but at the same time, who's forcing them to?
Last edited by a moderator: