Re: U of Miami
Yes, because no one would care if it wasn't an athlete. It would be some random student standing there, and that wouldn't help sell cars, nor would they get that kind of money for an appearance.
They are making money off of their status as an athlete. They might as well be paid for how many tackles they make, or how many points they average, because the higher profile the athlete the more money they're going to make for appearances.
Athletes get everything from food to clothing to rent paid by the schools. They still have the option of taking out student loans, if they need more money, and I would bet that a good portion of them are eligible for grants and they would receive money from those as well.
Yes, universities make tons and tons of money off of athletics. But they also take most of that money, if not all, and reinvest it into the school.
Whether it's a new jumbotron, or a new wing on their media building, it's going right back into the school one way or another.
When I leave school, I'm going to have a lot of money that I owe. When they get done with school, they either won't owe a dime or they will have very minimal loans.
Are we really going to try and complain that it's unfair to the student athlete? Their college experience is completely different than most, unless your getting everything paid for by your parents, but that still costs your family lots of money.
How much money is a college education worth? A hell of a lot more than a couple thousand dollars that you're going to make by appearing in a TV commercial.
Student athletes get a better benefit from their school than the rest of the student population, and it's not even close. If I start failing my courses, who cares. If the star QB starts failing, he will have every ounce of resources available to him from a personal tutor, to being able to take his final otuside of the classroom, and most likely, the benefit of the doubt from the instructor.
How much money does all those advantages equal up to?
I've got friends that have been on just about every athletic team at BSU, and I can't think of one that thinks they're being cheated.
The ones feeling cheated are those who go to big schools that see big checks. But how many schools really make money at those sports, when talking about the entire NCAA? Very, very few.
Letting the NCAA change it's rules, because a handful of schools out of a couple hundred have a hard time keeping their athletic programs in check is stupid. It will cause the collapse, or atleast make them fall out of Div 1 status, for a lot of schools.
If Texas/OSU/IU/Miami whom ever don't want to follow the rules in place by the NCAA, then don't be a member of the NCAA and start your own association where you're free to pay your players.
Don't drag the other 300+ schools down because a handful, in the grand scheme of it all, can't police themselves.
MAC schools, like Ball State, already lose money on their football programs. Most schools pay more for football than what football brings in. The BSU board I frequent has this topic of conversation quite often, some posters thinking BSU should drop down to Div II (like Butler) so the football program won't be a financial drain. Opening up payment for players, no matter how small, will put the final nail in the coffin.
And no, this isn't about BSU. I'm just using it as an example of how it would impact the other 90% of schools that make up the NCAA.
EDIT: About the schools who actually do profit off of their athletic programs. That is the exact reason why Texas A&M wants to leave the Big 12, because Texas has their own network.
A major school in a major conference can't even compete with Texas because of all the money they bring in. So in order to really compete, they feel like they have to go as far as moving out of their conference.
The whole thing is a benefit for a select amount of schools, while the massive majority get screwed.
Sounds just like the M.O. for the NCAA.
Yes, because no one would care if it wasn't an athlete. It would be some random student standing there, and that wouldn't help sell cars, nor would they get that kind of money for an appearance.
They are making money off of their status as an athlete. They might as well be paid for how many tackles they make, or how many points they average, because the higher profile the athlete the more money they're going to make for appearances.
Athletes get everything from food to clothing to rent paid by the schools. They still have the option of taking out student loans, if they need more money, and I would bet that a good portion of them are eligible for grants and they would receive money from those as well.
Yes, universities make tons and tons of money off of athletics. But they also take most of that money, if not all, and reinvest it into the school.
Whether it's a new jumbotron, or a new wing on their media building, it's going right back into the school one way or another.
When I leave school, I'm going to have a lot of money that I owe. When they get done with school, they either won't owe a dime or they will have very minimal loans.
Are we really going to try and complain that it's unfair to the student athlete? Their college experience is completely different than most, unless your getting everything paid for by your parents, but that still costs your family lots of money.
How much money is a college education worth? A hell of a lot more than a couple thousand dollars that you're going to make by appearing in a TV commercial.
Student athletes get a better benefit from their school than the rest of the student population, and it's not even close. If I start failing my courses, who cares. If the star QB starts failing, he will have every ounce of resources available to him from a personal tutor, to being able to take his final otuside of the classroom, and most likely, the benefit of the doubt from the instructor.
How much money does all those advantages equal up to?
I've got friends that have been on just about every athletic team at BSU, and I can't think of one that thinks they're being cheated.
The ones feeling cheated are those who go to big schools that see big checks. But how many schools really make money at those sports, when talking about the entire NCAA? Very, very few.
Letting the NCAA change it's rules, because a handful of schools out of a couple hundred have a hard time keeping their athletic programs in check is stupid. It will cause the collapse, or atleast make them fall out of Div 1 status, for a lot of schools.
If Texas/OSU/IU/Miami whom ever don't want to follow the rules in place by the NCAA, then don't be a member of the NCAA and start your own association where you're free to pay your players.
Don't drag the other 300+ schools down because a handful, in the grand scheme of it all, can't police themselves.
MAC schools, like Ball State, already lose money on their football programs. Most schools pay more for football than what football brings in. The BSU board I frequent has this topic of conversation quite often, some posters thinking BSU should drop down to Div II (like Butler) so the football program won't be a financial drain. Opening up payment for players, no matter how small, will put the final nail in the coffin.
And no, this isn't about BSU. I'm just using it as an example of how it would impact the other 90% of schools that make up the NCAA.
EDIT: About the schools who actually do profit off of their athletic programs. That is the exact reason why Texas A&M wants to leave the Big 12, because Texas has their own network.
A major school in a major conference can't even compete with Texas because of all the money they bring in. So in order to really compete, they feel like they have to go as far as moving out of their conference.
The whole thing is a benefit for a select amount of schools, while the massive majority get screwed.
Sounds just like the M.O. for the NCAA.
Comment