@bigbun
Businesses don't have "unlimited money" either, yet they still find a way to pay their employees. How? Through revenue generation, exactly the process by which schools afford to pay coaches millions of dollars right now. If a business can't afford to pay its employees a certain salary, that busines can either get new employees, ask their current employees to take a lower salary, or go out of the business. The same is true of institutions. But you know what? Colleges make so much money that they'll pay players rather than let their football cash cow fold. That's simple economics (which you know nothing about).
Student athletes are practically employees, as determined by at least one national economic board. Anyone who fufils the same duties and have similar obligations to employees, therefore they are employees in all but name. If student athletes had the ability to freely move and argue for more pay, their being paid nothing right now wouldn't matter. But because the NCAA insists on denying student athletes' their due rights, the NCAA engages in illegality. A ghetto brother should be able to haggle to increase his pay and demand payment just like anyone else. A person can get educated at any time, and especially so with some hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars in tow.
And that cap is arbitrary nonsense that won't stand in court after appeals. There's no legal argument that suggests there should be a 5000$ cap on NCAA athlete compensation. I could care less if other programs beside men's basketball and football sue institution. Colleges make far more money from football than they lose. But if some want to destroy their programs for principle's sale, let them.
I said from the first Title IX would stand as no obstacle. Gender equality has nothing to do with compensation so long as everyone has the express right to get compensation regardless of gender. And in any positive ruling for student athletes' compensation, everyone would have the right to be compensated.
You are familiar with nothing. You were parroting the "Title IX" line until the day the federal judge threw the bullshyt out. There's no legal justification for the government capping anyone's compensation at $5000/year so long as the government concedes that person is an employee or acts like one in a capacity. Absent the long arm of cac corruption, legal battles will hash that out quick. You don't know what you're talking about, then as now.
