The only people at the school getting rich from it (ie, big salaries) are coaches and athletic directors. The rest of the money goes to build facilities and support non-revenue athletes.
That doesn't weaken your point, though.
College Student Athletes get Paid???!
- Thread starter Candice Beards
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
The only people at the school getting rich from it (ie, big salaries) are coaches and athletic directors. The rest of the money goes to build facilities and support non-revenue athletes.
That doesn't weaken your point, though.
Slappers
Don't like labels
I believe that the free education is payment enough BUT the NCAA needs to loosen the regulations to allow the students to eat. The escrow account is a fantastic idea as well. I also don't have a problem with selling autographs and such.
Competitive advantage becomes the issue there. You can make more money selling your jersey or autograph at Notre Dame than if you go to Utah.
The salaries for the big-name coaches and ADs are really getting out of hand. I remember growing up in Arkansas, the twin daughters of the Razorbacks football team were classmates of mine. In those days, the HC for one of the top schools in the country was paid about as much as, say, a full professor.
These days the Razorbacks head football coach makes about $3-4 million a year. You could hire a LOT of professors for that kind of money.
If the coaches are making that kind of money off the athletes, then the athletes should get at least a small cut.
Softball is different, though. It is one of the programs paid out of the receipts from the big money sports, or else the general student fund for the smaller schools.
These days the Razorbacks head football coach makes about $3-4 million a year. You could hire a LOT of professors for that kind of money.
If the coaches are making that kind of money off the athletes, then the athletes should get at least a small cut.
Softball is different, though. It is one of the programs paid out of the receipts from the big money sports, or else the general student fund for the smaller schools.
Slappers
Don't like labels
I don't understand what you mean by competitive advantage.
Great thread, and a topic that I am particularly passionate about. My grandfather was a professor at Eastern Michigan - he felt very strongly that the student athletes were being exploited by the universities. There is plenty of isolated, anecdotal evidence towards this feeling, and professors do experience students who are being "passed along" - who are not really receiving the education that they are entitled to.
I don't really have a problem with the salaries that coaches and ADs are earning. You get what you pay for, in the end. Athletics are a big, big part of the University - they infiltrate every aspect of the University's success. A successful sports program makes high school students excited to attend that school. The more students that apply, the pickier the school can be regarding acceptance. SAT scores go up, class rank goes up, and the school climbs the ladder of prestige. Once this happens, the students who are the potential leaders in their fields of science, math, language, etc. start to take notice and want to go to the school - not to attend football games, but to be a part of the newly prestigious academic atmosphere.
Some of the football and basketball players at the top academic D1 schools are indeed there to put in their years before going pro, and I think that's fine. If that's the agreement that the University and the student feel comfortable with, then everyone gets what they want.
I'm missing something on the whole food issue - I've toured several D1 football locker rooms and they all have private, fully stocked kitchens, so I find it odd that some kids think they aren't getting enough to eat, but I could be very wrong on this issue. Nobody should go hungry, especially kids who are still growing and need 3000 calories, at least, per day.
Bottom line, I do think that a small stipend is in order - enough to buy clothes if needed, or even just to meet your new best friends from math class for coffee. Your new math buddy can sell her math expertise to pay for her coffee, but you are not allowed to profit from your basketball prowess, which seems unfair.
P.S - I think competitive advantage means that a school such as Notre Dame, which has a big name that is universally recognized inside and outside of the athletic arena, has a natural advantage over Utah, which is not as well known.
I don't really have a problem with the salaries that coaches and ADs are earning. You get what you pay for, in the end. Athletics are a big, big part of the University - they infiltrate every aspect of the University's success. A successful sports program makes high school students excited to attend that school. The more students that apply, the pickier the school can be regarding acceptance. SAT scores go up, class rank goes up, and the school climbs the ladder of prestige. Once this happens, the students who are the potential leaders in their fields of science, math, language, etc. start to take notice and want to go to the school - not to attend football games, but to be a part of the newly prestigious academic atmosphere.
Some of the football and basketball players at the top academic D1 schools are indeed there to put in their years before going pro, and I think that's fine. If that's the agreement that the University and the student feel comfortable with, then everyone gets what they want.
I'm missing something on the whole food issue - I've toured several D1 football locker rooms and they all have private, fully stocked kitchens, so I find it odd that some kids think they aren't getting enough to eat, but I could be very wrong on this issue. Nobody should go hungry, especially kids who are still growing and need 3000 calories, at least, per day.
Bottom line, I do think that a small stipend is in order - enough to buy clothes if needed, or even just to meet your new best friends from math class for coffee. Your new math buddy can sell her math expertise to pay for her coffee, but you are not allowed to profit from your basketball prowess, which seems unfair.
P.S - I think competitive advantage means that a school such as Notre Dame, which has a big name that is universally recognized inside and outside of the athletic arena, has a natural advantage over Utah, which is not as well known.
It would be a recruiting advantage for certain schools. ''Come to Notre Dame, and you'll make hundreds of dollars on autographs and jersey sales.''
Slappers
Don't like labels
Gotcha...I was thinking something completely different. Not sure where my mind is at today.
Exactly, you are gonna say its nothing for the football/basketball teams to sacrifice. The money making programs (football/basketball) are going to say, why should we sacrifice since we bring in all the money. Back to square one because you know who the college is gonna side with.
Its the same arguments that have went on for ages. This would be another argument.
I just think the smaller colleges without the huge programs would be hurt by this. I do think something little can be done asap atleast
I think all the kids on full rides ie football and basketball are given food and shelter. When they decide to live off campus they are given the $ equivalent to pay rent and food... But they don't get it to stretch the whole year so they act like the school isnt feeding them. When its the student's poor choices or poor money management that makes them hungry. If they lived on campus they would never miss a meal.
