Fan Nation
Forums
Forum list
Search forums
Rules & Policies
Podcast
Mobile App
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Shop
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
College Free Agency....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Zubaz" data-source="post: 2692287" data-attributes="member: 3528"><p>But that gets to the point of what the goal of the NCAA or college athletics is. If the NCAA's primary goal is to produce "a product that the public is interested in" (and then turn around and sell that product for hundreds of millions of dollars), then that's different than a situation where their stated goal is amateur competition and the wellbeing of the students that compete under their athletic banner. If that's the case, then fine, but call it what it is: A moneymaking enterprise, and with that comes implications of how their athletes are viewed. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I 100% agree with this...and it is 100% irrelevant to the point. "College sports would be less interesting" is not a compelling reason to continue a weird hybrid where the schools / organizations get the benefits of tens of millions of dollars (at least) generated from games, revenue, licensing...while the athletes are stuck with "you're an amateur athlete, and a student first. You get a $30k a year scholarship plus a stipend but you can't earn money elsewhere...oh and we get to tell you where you can and can't transfer if you want to keep playing".</p><p></p><p>Any discussion over the merits of such system is independent of "can college football survive if we have to change?" If a system is unjust, and I'm not saying it is, then "yeah but we couldn't operate any other way" can not be accepted as an excuse to continue an unjust system.</p><p></p><p>And you're right, very few people care about minor league sports. MiLB, D-League, AHL, they don't draw flies. Not disagreeing with that at all. </p><p></p><p></p><p>85 scholarships is, what, somewhere around $5mm total using the most generous estimates of attendance cost (and even then that's a weird metric since that's just money they pay themselves)? If the revenue generated by these schools was limited to the cost of attendance for the student athletes plus expenses, this isn't an issue. Even if the financial benefit that these schools generate went to the players in a way proportionate to other sports (e.g. in that 35-55% range you see in the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc), then this conversation is probably pretty different.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Zubaz, post: 2692287, member: 3528"] But that gets to the point of what the goal of the NCAA or college athletics is. If the NCAA's primary goal is to produce "a product that the public is interested in" (and then turn around and sell that product for hundreds of millions of dollars), then that's different than a situation where their stated goal is amateur competition and the wellbeing of the students that compete under their athletic banner. If that's the case, then fine, but call it what it is: A moneymaking enterprise, and with that comes implications of how their athletes are viewed. I 100% agree with this...and it is 100% irrelevant to the point. "College sports would be less interesting" is not a compelling reason to continue a weird hybrid where the schools / organizations get the benefits of tens of millions of dollars (at least) generated from games, revenue, licensing...while the athletes are stuck with "you're an amateur athlete, and a student first. You get a $30k a year scholarship plus a stipend but you can't earn money elsewhere...oh and we get to tell you where you can and can't transfer if you want to keep playing". Any discussion over the merits of such system is independent of "can college football survive if we have to change?" If a system is unjust, and I'm not saying it is, then "yeah but we couldn't operate any other way" can not be accepted as an excuse to continue an unjust system. And you're right, very few people care about minor league sports. MiLB, D-League, AHL, they don't draw flies. Not disagreeing with that at all. 85 scholarships is, what, somewhere around $5mm total using the most generous estimates of attendance cost (and even then that's a weird metric since that's just money they pay themselves)? If the revenue generated by these schools was limited to the cost of attendance for the student athletes plus expenses, this isn't an issue. Even if the financial benefit that these schools generate went to the players in a way proportionate to other sports (e.g. in that 35-55% range you see in the NFL, MLB, NBA, etc), then this conversation is probably pretty different. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Which team did TCU defeat in the College Football Playoffs?
Post reply
Forums
Horned Frog Athletics
Scott & Wes Frog Fan Forum
College Free Agency....
Top