11/21/24
March 30, 2011
NCAA President: Players Need More Money: Although new NCAA president Tim Emmert has said it's "grossly unacceptable and inappropriate to pay players," at the upcoming NCAA board meetings in April he wants to explore the possibility of paying players -- at least a scholarship increase to cover travel, laundry and other typical college expenses. "The sooner, the better," he said. A USA Today analysis claims that a Division I men's basketball scholarship has an annual worth to the player of $120,000.
posted by rcade to basketball at 10:00 AM - 5 comments
Thanks. Fixed. The methodology of that $120,000 seems bloated to me. Assigning a cash value to "elite coaching" and "strength and conditioning consulting"? The reason athletes have those things is to be more successful in school as athletes. It's not like they're using that elite coaching for financial gain after college, unless they're the 1-in-a-1,000 who goes on to a pro career.
posted by rcade at 01:54 PM on March 30, 2011
That $120,000 is way bloated. Some of that attributable to income to the athletes are more like business expenses for the colleges. Getting treated for a knee injury you got on the job is not considered income in any real world scenario. That PR stuff is crap as well because that is for the college not the athlete. And, to some extent, this schools devalue even their tuition when they fail to graduate many players and steer other players to easy degrees that won't help them get a job in the future.
posted by bperk at 09:11 PM on March 30, 2011
And, to some extent, this schools devalue even their tuition when they fail to graduate many players and steer other players to easy degrees that won't help them get a job in the future. Good point.
posted by outonleave at 06:38 AM on March 31, 2011
... schools devalue even their tuition when they fail to graduate many players and steer other players to easy degrees that won't help them get a job in the future.
Every time this sort of discussion comes up, in my own mind I keep coming back to the same question: why are these student-athletes in college to begin with? The purpose of a university education is, first, to produce intellectually mature, rounded individuals, and, secondly to (hopefully) equip them with marketable skills that will prepare them for a lifetime career. It is NOT to groom a (relatively small) pool of future NBA/NFL/MLB/etc. draftees.
Some students come from families that can afford to pay for their education outright; others, like me, had to work their way though college--washing dishes, delivering pizza, pumping gas, etc. Still others, because of need or athletic talent, are given a free (or near-free) education.
True, the sums generated by intercollegiate sports is huge, but unlike professional teams this revenue should not be going into the pockets of the university administrators but (hopefully) right back into the schools' educational mission in the form of teacher/support staff salaries, scholarships for the needy/deserving, improvement of the educational facilities, and on and on.
Where the schools fail these student-athletes is NOT in not paying them, but rather in holding them to a lower (non-existent?) academic standard than that to which the general student population is held. The vast majority of them will not go on to play sports professionally, and most of those that do will, in the end, will wind up short-term journeymen not making the astronomical sums reserved for the elite few. The real scandal, to me, is in admitting many of these students in the first place, if they are not intellectually capable of doing college work, and, once having admitted them, not putting their education before their playing time--which means enforcing suspensions, probation, and, in the last resort, expulsions for academic failure.
posted by billinnagoya at 09:11 PM on April 01, 2011
link goes to top stories page....
I believe this is the same story....