Not arguing against offering collegiate athletes compensation, but I think those revenue dollars get spent fairly quickly, especially when you’re paying head coaches $4MM a year.[/quote]
That gets to my larger point. The head coaches and the whole NCAA human infrastructure (at least at the Division I level) are making gobs of money off of these athletes. I’d rather see the money go to the athletes than the coaches, administrators, etc.
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
The cynic in me also believes there is plenty of “compensation” going around from alum organizations and “friends” of the program, too. Perhaps not as egregious as it was during the 1960s – mid 1980s, but its still there.[/quote]
Agreed. Let’s stop pretending and get it all out in the open.
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
But I’d opine that most student-athletes ARE student-athletes. Yes, I realize for every Stanford or Notre Dame, there are programs that are sub-standard, but I’d imagine that most collegiate athletes play for love of the sport, and not because they’re seeing dollar signs post-college.[/quote]
I agree. My “pay the athletes” plan would realistically only apply to the big Division I schools. The vast majority of college athletes aren’t worth much from a compensation standpoint (that’s just reality). And they can play for non-Division I schools (and get scholarships, etc.) just as they do now. My plan would really only affect how things work at the largest basketball and football programs – that is, the ones that take in almost all of the money. Given all the money that flies around, these athletes are effectively semi-pros that don’t get paid (or get paid in the form of a scholarship that many can’t even take advantage of due to the time commitments of the sport they play).
