Is paying college athletes for their "brand" a tsunami in a tea kettle?
The controversy surrounding paying student athletes applies only to two sports: Basketball and Football. All other college sports do not generate anywhere near the kind of income that the Big Two do.
To begin let's clarify: Is it possible that the term Student/Athlete is an oxymoron? I'm not being snarky. I do not know the stats, but I'd be willing to bet that the basketball and football players who could sell their "brand" while attending college are not those who normally graduate from college, but leave early to join the pros where they can earn big bucks. As for other sports "stars" I give a nod to an Olympic athlete who returns to college. He or she may or may not have a "brand" that a sponsor might be willing to take on.
Going forward, I'm going to assume my premise is correct, in which case I see no reason to pay college atheltes unless the individual "star athletes" are willing to share their [in college] income with the rest of their fellow teammates. Rationale: "stars' do not shine brighter than the rest of the lesser stars in their constellation.
The alternative in my opinion is that the college splits the the entire basketball and football per year income 50/50 with all student athletes, each student athlete getting a check of equal amount. Rationale: A gymnast works just as hard to bring glory to the university as a basketball player.
I lean to the 50/50 option because it seems more equitable, covering all sports.
It is worth remembering that all scholarship athletes get full tuition room and board for their efforts on their sporting team. The last time I looked four yearsat a state school costs around $112 thousand. At a private college the costs for four years tuition, room and board comes to approximately $200 grand.
In return for a four-year free college education, an athlete is asked to be both a student and an athlete - a tough job no doubt. I've done it. It requires giving up a lot, usually personal entertainments, although I'm not sure I gave up too many dates or parties during my time being a student/athlete.
I guess I don't get what all the hoopla is about. Baseball figured it out a long time ago. The pros established a minor league. "Stars" in high school did not go to college (often) but went directly into MBL's system and worked their way up. It's time the NFL and the NBA provide the same kind of program for high school "stars" - minor leagues (NBA has a head start with the G League) so they don't have to do the "hypocrisy" few couple of years in college thing. Start doing what they are born to do from the beginning. If they're really interested in sociology 101, they can can always go to college later in life and pay their way. Harsh? You might want to ask a few random students on campus.
Net result college football and basketball will have to continue without the "stars" I'm not sure the games will suffer much. Most alums will continue to attend. There would have to be cost cutting,so the "minor" sports would not suffer, but it's all doable with a little less greed.
It's time sports in America went European anyway. From the get-go, the Europeans don't mix sports and education. Sports belong in sports clubs; education belongs in schools. What a concept!
Remember this; we all did it when we were really amateurs.
Playing The Game by Barbara Goldowwsky
You stick out our fist: stone
breaks my two fingers playing scissors.
You offer your hand, open.
I shred the palm: it's paper.
Have you no heart? you ask.
But I am stone.
Yor hand is still paper,
you wrap me up:
closer than blades,
harder than hearts.
