jerseyshorejohnny
Well-known member
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/lets-start-paying-college-athletes.html?_r=1&hpw
NY Times / Let's Start Paying College Athletes
- Thread starter jerseyshorejohnny
- Start date
Read this piece in the NYT magazine today and thought it was very interesting. I definitely agree with the writer that college athletes should get paid considering the amount of revenue they bring to the university and the fact that they have games 2-3 times a week and practices. It is very time consuming to be an athlete.
Also, he brings up an excellent point that basketball and football players can't go pro from high school so college is the equivalent of minor leagues for athletes of those respective sports. Baseball and hockey players could get drafted out of high school and play in the minors right away (many opt for college), but at least they have the option, football and basketball players don't.
The writer makes good suggestions, but I don't know how to pay college athletes but I think they deserve something other than an scholarship considering many of these athletes don't have time for class like a ordinary student being on the road and in practice constantly.
Also, he brings up an excellent point that basketball and football players can't go pro from high school so college is the equivalent of minor leagues for athletes of those respective sports. Baseball and hockey players could get drafted out of high school and play in the minors right away (many opt for college), but at least they have the option, football and basketball players don't.
The writer makes good suggestions, but I don't know how to pay college athletes but I think they deserve something other than an scholarship considering many of these athletes don't have time for class like a ordinary student being on the road and in practice constantly.
Northern Storm
Member
Personally, I think it's a stupid idea. This nonsense keeps rearing it's ugly head every 5 years or so. I have always been against it, and I always will be. Yeah, just what we need, athletes with bankrolls. And just what do you think these, sometimes immature kids will spend their money on? End of discussion.
I remember when St. Johns had the stipend. Some of the kids actually helped their parents pay their rent.
These kids can't work---like many college kids do. They have no extra money to spend on necessities, let alone an occasinal trip home to see their families. While they are getting a free education, they should also be given some pocket money. I doubt that they will be given the "bankroll" that you describe.
I love college sports, and especially college basketball, but I really believe the model is unsustainable. We try to treat major college athletes like amateurs but to everyone else in the industry, including the coach, the AD, and the television networks; their "amateur sport" is a major business.
College athletics should only be for Olympic sports and truly amateur sports, that NEED the support of universities to exist. Much like an art or music program would not exist outside the University setting, because there isn't enough demand for it in the open market place, but the school believes such a program enriches the experiences of it's students and therefore they devout funds to it.
Basketball and Football athletes at the D1 level should be in the minor leagues if their goal is to play professionally. The NBA and NFL use the NCAA as a free developmental league. Just look to Europe, if you're 16 and you're a stud soccer player, you sign with a pro team, they send you to their development or minor league team and you go to school while you learn to be a pro soccer player. The same thing exists for hockey both overseas and in Canada, and also for baseball in Latin america. Only the united states has this illogical connection between quasi-professional athletics and academic institutions. The truth is the two aren't friendly bedfellows.
No one told Michael Phelps he had to go to college to be a professional swimmer, and Robinson Cano didn't have to go to college to be the best second basemen in pro baseball. Why does Moe Harkless have to go to college to pursue his dream of being a pro basketball player? Yes, I know he could go play overseas, but in this country he has no other alternative. In effect, he's forced to play for free for a University. Yes, he's getting a college education which is of considerable value, but the fact is he's not asking for that... he's asking for the opportunity to play pro basketball, and we're saying you HAVE to go to a college to do it.
He should have been able to sign with the Knicks minor league/development team when he was 16-18. They would train him to be a better basketball player, and he could get an education along the way. All the while getting paid.
Then colleges could get back to doing what they do best, and what they're mission is; educate.
It's a dramatic change, I know. And again, I love college basketball - but this system just doesn't make sense. Feel free to disagree, I know i'm on the fringe in thinking the way I do.
College athletics should only be for Olympic sports and truly amateur sports, that NEED the support of universities to exist. Much like an art or music program would not exist outside the University setting, because there isn't enough demand for it in the open market place, but the school believes such a program enriches the experiences of it's students and therefore they devout funds to it.
Basketball and Football athletes at the D1 level should be in the minor leagues if their goal is to play professionally. The NBA and NFL use the NCAA as a free developmental league. Just look to Europe, if you're 16 and you're a stud soccer player, you sign with a pro team, they send you to their development or minor league team and you go to school while you learn to be a pro soccer player. The same thing exists for hockey both overseas and in Canada, and also for baseball in Latin america. Only the united states has this illogical connection between quasi-professional athletics and academic institutions. The truth is the two aren't friendly bedfellows.
No one told Michael Phelps he had to go to college to be a professional swimmer, and Robinson Cano didn't have to go to college to be the best second basemen in pro baseball. Why does Moe Harkless have to go to college to pursue his dream of being a pro basketball player? Yes, I know he could go play overseas, but in this country he has no other alternative. In effect, he's forced to play for free for a University. Yes, he's getting a college education which is of considerable value, but the fact is he's not asking for that... he's asking for the opportunity to play pro basketball, and we're saying you HAVE to go to a college to do it.
He should have been able to sign with the Knicks minor league/development team when he was 16-18. They would train him to be a better basketball player, and he could get an education along the way. All the while getting paid.
Then colleges could get back to doing what they do best, and what they're mission is; educate.
It's a dramatic change, I know. And again, I love college basketball - but this system just doesn't make sense. Feel free to disagree, I know i'm on the fringe in thinking the way I do.