<< <i>make no mistake, if the economics of collegiate athletics get overhauled, it will do more harm than good. let's envision the possibility of slashing funding for other sports as a means of offering something more to football players. the trickle down effect of this will discourage younger athletes from staying involved in other competitive sports if there is nowhere to go after a certain age. aren't we trying to encourage these very same children to stay active so they CAN participate in other sports?
seems kind of irrational to me to consider wiping out less popular sports because only a few people want to watch. almost hypocritical. >>
+1
Could imagine Texas A&M cutting baseball, softball, field hockey, lacrosse and track just to pay Johnny Manziel a $2,000,000 signing bonus? >>
The school and the players should be able to make this choice-not YOU.
By your own research the collegiate athletic system is losing millions and millions every year. The current system as researched by YOU is BROKEN but your idea to make it better is to keep doing the same thing? That's the very definition of insanity!
<< <i>The school and the players should be able to make this choice-not YOU.
By your own research the collegiate athletic system is losing millions and millions every year. The current system as researched by YOU is BROKEN but your idea to make it better is to keep doing the same thing? That's the very definition of insanity! >>
You're absolutely right, the Athletic Directors should make that choice, not me.
I would not like the current system to remain unchanged. The current college athletic financial structure is sickening, but the solution is most certainly not paying players. Unfortunately, the only way to balance the books for the majority of Athletic Departments is to cut programs.
If you would like my suggestions:
1. Football and Basketball programs that are not operating in the black must get cut. I am singling out football and basketball because they generally will take down an entire Athletic Department if they're failing (ie. Temple University). 2. Athletes (on or not on scholarship) may receive an additional $10,000 scholarship on financial need basis. This will prevent all those D1 football players from starving. 3. Any large* program that has been losing money for a three year period will get cut. *a large program would be one to account for more than 10% of the athletic departments total expenses. I am singling out large programs because it may take 7 or 8 smaller programs to make up the losses for one larger program. 4. Coaches will receive a $300,000 salary cap. This way the players and coaches will make the same. 5. State subsidiaries cannot be used to bail out failing athletic departments. 6. Athletic activities cannot take priority over classes
If you don't want the schools to directly pay the players - understandable, given the mess* that it could create - then, for the love of God, at least do two things: 1) Let the players take jobs or make money from their likenesses via autographs or whatever. Even if you say "you can ONLY do this in school-scheduled events", do SOMETHING; 2) Give the players a cut of merchandise and game sales. It is utterly ridiculous that there are football cards of Johnny Manziel, or #2 jerseys all over the A&M bookstore, or a "QB #2" playing for A&M in video games and Johnny doesn't get a cut. AND that the NCAA takes for themselves a license to use the players' likenesses for life.
* - if the schools start paying players, you obviously run into a lot of other issues - title IX, what to do with non-revenue sports, health care, and workman's comp, among other things. It's a mess.
Comments
<< <i>
<< <i>make no mistake, if the economics of collegiate athletics get overhauled, it will do more harm than good. let's envision the possibility of slashing funding for other sports as a means of offering something more to football players. the trickle down effect of this will discourage younger athletes from staying involved in other competitive sports if there is nowhere to go after a certain age. aren't we trying to encourage these very same children to stay active so they CAN participate in other sports?
seems kind of irrational to me to consider wiping out less popular sports because only a few people want to watch. almost hypocritical. >>
+1
Could imagine Texas A&M cutting baseball, softball, field hockey, lacrosse and track just to pay Johnny Manziel a $2,000,000 signing bonus? >>
The school and the players should be able to make this choice-not YOU.
By your own research the collegiate athletic system is losing millions and millions every year. The current system as researched by YOU is BROKEN but your idea to make it better is to keep doing the same thing? That's the very definition of insanity!
<< <i>The school and the players should be able to make this choice-not YOU.
By your own research the collegiate athletic system is losing millions and millions every year. The current system as researched by YOU is BROKEN but your idea to make it better is to keep doing the same thing? That's the very definition of insanity! >>
You're absolutely right, the Athletic Directors should make that choice, not me.
I would not like the current system to remain unchanged. The current college athletic financial structure is sickening, but the solution is most certainly not paying players. Unfortunately, the only way to balance the books for the majority of Athletic Departments is to cut programs.
If you would like my suggestions:
1. Football and Basketball programs that are not operating in the black must get cut. I am singling out football and basketball because they generally will take down an entire Athletic Department if they're failing (ie. Temple University).
2. Athletes (on or not on scholarship) may receive an additional $10,000 scholarship on financial need basis. This will prevent all those D1 football players from starving.
3. Any large* program that has been losing money for a three year period will get cut. *a large program would be one to account for more than 10% of the athletic departments total expenses. I am singling out large programs because it may take 7 or 8 smaller programs to make up the losses for one larger program.
4. Coaches will receive a $300,000 salary cap. This way the players and coaches will make the same.
5. State subsidiaries cannot be used to bail out failing athletic departments.
6. Athletic activities cannot take priority over classes
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
Let the schools and players work out a payment arrangement both are happy with. Trying to impose random dollar amounts won't work.
* - if the schools start paying players, you obviously run into a lot of other issues - title IX, what to do with non-revenue sports, health care, and workman's comp, among other things. It's a mess.