|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 27, 2014 9:56:48 GMT -5
If you thought Title IX was an issue for college sports, how about pay equality between a D 1 quarterback and a field hockey player? Why on earth do people presume that a revenue losing sport will take the profits from the revenue generating sports and split it equally? That's actually the NCAA's CURRENT model. THe whole damn point of ending the student athlete charade at BIG time fb and bball schools is to de-couple the current form of socialism and replace it with a far more American eat what you kill system. It astounds me that free market conservatives could be against this. It just means they are being reactionary and haven't thought about it at all. This moronic sports talk argument..."Are you going to pay the jv field hockey players too? " NO!!!!!!!!!!! Why the hell would you? The fact that they are NOT MAKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS in TV and ticket revenue isn't exactly a subtle difference in a debate about fair compensation. I am sure Gtown might suffer WHEN nNot if) the NCAA cartel crumbles, but first things first. What's right is right. And the NCAA needs to be smashed into smithereens. We need to stop pretending that the University of Alabama isn't a college with a pro football team attached to it. Players who can command a salary should get one. If they want to attend classes for free as a benefit or working for the university that should be their choice but not tied at all to their professional career. Just like a pro musician or actor or web designer who attends some classes still has a right to earn and learn. There could be no more pro-acdemia argument than this: no more basket weaving. No more tutors. No more pass/fail art history. Schools can become schools again and pro sports teams can remain as they are but stop lying to us about it. Tell me again....What is Nick Saban earning to coach that "amatuer" team again? Enough to cover 5 classes a semester at a state school? A bit more? By the way REAL student athletes will continue to exist. They will use their option to learn and be able to complete degrees when and if an NFL or NBA opportunity comes to an end. This will be a free market benefit. And those who do will be the real deal, not the fake student-athlete of SEC football and ACC bball that we talk about today. And oh by the way, 98% of current NCAA teams will not be affected by this AT ALL. You'll get no argument from me. Count me among those that think that enormous change is coming. It may not be as a result of this case (or any of the lawsuits pending, or realignment), but the entire system is going to change in some fundamental way. The question, though, is whether the major sports retain their popularity when there is no longer any pretense of real connection to a university's academic mission. It is a myth -- but so are lots of things -- and myths can be powerful to a lot of people. Will students and alumni cheer as readily for teams on which the players don't even pretend to attend classes and on which truly the only connection is that they are playing in the same town and us the school's colors? I don't know. Aside from that, though, Title IX remains the law of the land. It was promulgated in an era where these issues didn't exist -- there were scholarships to attend school but it wasn't yet clear the extent of the enormous revenues (from TV or elsewhere) available. It's a regime ill-equipped to deal with a situation where students are actually getting a piece of the revenue itself.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,848
|
Post by thebin on Mar 27, 2014 10:10:41 GMT -5
"The question, though, is whether the major sports retain their popularity when there is no longer any pretense of real connection to a university's academic mission...."
Totally agree with this point. For sure the myth you speak of is about to take a beating. Fair enough.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Mar 27, 2014 10:21:42 GMT -5
Golden goose and pandora's box are terms that come to mind. Maybe all sports will have to follow the Div III model. Even the D-III model doesn't actually make sense when you consider elite liberal arts colleges who actively recruit athletes and give them preferential admissions treatment, often to the point that they comprise much larger portions of the undergraduate student body than at their massive football factory peers. The University of Michigan, with 28,000 undergrads, can much easier integrate and accommodate 100 football players than can Amherst College take on 80 in their tiny campus of under 1800. Even if we assume those Lord Jeffs have SAT scores 200-300 points higher (on average) than the Wolverines, they likely still fall another 200 points below those of their non-varsity peers. Both schools field 27 varsity teams despite their great disparity in total student body, and I assure you that Amherst recruits for all of those teams (I know plenty of people from my high school who went to similar schools in part for their skills in lacrosse, tennis, soccer, etc.). D-I revenue sports may be the biggest sham, and certainly the most unfair to its participants, but the whole system is illogical when considering the stated goals of higher education.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,620
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Mar 27, 2014 10:43:43 GMT -5
D-I revenue sports may be the biggest sham, and certainly the most unfair to its participants, but the whole system is illogical when considering the stated goals of higher education. In fairness, I think 'higher education' in the U.S. has stated a lot of goals. Fielding athletics teams is one of them, given how near-universal it is. So is socioeconomic diversity, which athletics programs help with (e.g. what % of Georgetown's Af-Am student body are recruited athletes?). Creating multigenerational college affiliation is another, and academically elite schools do use non-revenue sports as an extra legacy preference system in some instances. But you already know all this. Nice letter in the AAP Newsletter btw!
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,848
|
Post by thebin on Mar 27, 2014 11:18:19 GMT -5
Golden goose and pandora's box are terms that come to mind. Maybe all sports will have to follow the Div III model. Even the D-III model doesn't actually make sense when you consider elite liberal arts colleges who actively recruit athletes and give them preferential admissions treatment, often to the point that they comprise much larger portions of the undergraduate student body than at their massive football factory peers. The University of Michigan, with 28,000 undergrads, can much easier integrate and accommodate 100 football players than can Amherst College take on 80 in their tiny campus of under 1800. Even if we assume those Lord Jeffs have SAT scores 200-300 points higher (on average) than the Wolverines, they likely still fall another 200 points below those of their non-varsity peers. Both schools field 27 varsity teams despite their great disparity in total student body, and I assure you that Amherst recruits for all of those teams (I know plenty of people from my high school who went to similar schools in part for their skills in lacrosse, tennis, soccer, etc.). D-I revenue sports may be the biggest sham, and certainly the most unfair to its participants, but the whole system is illogical when considering the stated goals of higher education. This is all true. I had an open admit to Williams college based on FB without even applying. And yet this seems to me the sort of amateur athletics that is in keeping with a pretty old concept of well-rounded education. I mean going back to the Greek academies really. You are right that their mean SATs/grades are going to be lower than student body but no school I know of says their admissions mandate is to select the highest grades/SAT metric kids period. I think the NESCAC and Ivy models are still legit in that they avoid the problem of making millions of dollars and everything that comes with that....
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Mar 27, 2014 17:03:29 GMT -5
They are not demanding to be paid: www.collegeathletespa.org/whatCAPA will ultimately allow players to collectively bargain for comprehensive reform such as:
Guaranteed coverage for sports-related medical expenses for current and former players. Minimizing the risk of sports-related traumatic brain injury. Reduce contact in practices like the NFL and Pop Warner have done, place independent concussion experts on the sidelines, and establish uniform return to play protocols. Improving graduation rates. Establish an educational trust fund to help former players complete their degree and reward those who graduate on time. Consistent with evolving NCAA regulations or future legal mandates, increasing athletic scholarships and allowing players to receive compensation for commercial sponsorships. Securing due process rights. Players should not be punished simply because they are accused of a rule violation, and any punishments levied should be consistent across campuses.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Mar 27, 2014 18:31:30 GMT -5
They are not demanding to be paid: www.collegeathletespa.org/whatCAPA will ultimately allow players to collectively bargain for comprehensive reform such as:
Guaranteed coverage for sports-related medical expenses for current and former players. Minimizing the risk of sports-related traumatic brain injury. Reduce contact in practices like the NFL and Pop Warner have done, place independent concussion experts on the sidelines, and establish uniform return to play protocols. Improving graduation rates. Establish an educational trust fund to help former players complete their degree and reward those who graduate on time. Consistent with evolving NCAA regulations or future legal mandates, increasing athletic scholarships and allowing players to receive compensation for commercial sponsorships. Securing due process rights. Players should not be punished simply because they are accused of a rule violation, and any punishments levied should be consistent across campuses.
Yet
|
|
|
Post by vanman on Mar 28, 2014 22:11:01 GMT -5
Why does this have to be so complex? If you play on a team that generates net revenue for your school then yes, go ahead and dig in. But if you're on a team that costs the school money then have fun but remember to hit the books. Money making sports are entertainment. Plain and simple. If a school wants to entertain then poney up. Oh yea one more thing, let's lose the "nonprofit" status that higher education enjoys.
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Mar 29, 2014 8:55:02 GMT -5
They are not demanding to be paid: www.collegeathletespa.org/whatCAPA will ultimately allow players to collectively bargain for comprehensive reform such as:
Guaranteed coverage for sports-related medical expenses for current and former players. Minimizing the risk of sports-related traumatic brain injury. Reduce contact in practices like the NFL and Pop Warner have done, place independent concussion experts on the sidelines, and establish uniform return to play protocols. Improving graduation rates. Establish an educational trust fund to help former players complete their degree and reward those who graduate on time. Consistent with evolving NCAA regulations or future legal mandates, increasing athletic scholarships and allowing players to receive compensation for commercial sponsorships. Securing due process rights. Players should not be punished simply because they are accused of a rule violation, and any punishments levied should be consistent across campuses.
I think all these things are perfectly reasonable desires, but I dont think asking to be unionized is the best way to go about it. The Unionization part seems like more of a publicity measure to make sure that the news covers it. But there are a few issues with the presumptions behind these demands. Medical issues: Athletes are able to access preventative medical resources for free that are not available to all students (physical therapy, trainers, ice/heat tanks, etc.). Of course that doesnt address catastrophic injuries which may need more support. And of course TBI issues are very important for all sports, and I agree with them there. Graduation rates: According to the NCAA, graduation rates for Div 1 athletes is 79% (i.e. "79 percent of all Division I athletes entering school between 2000-01 and 2003-04 earned a degree within six years") while according to the department of education the graduation rates for all students is 59% in 6 years (and that includes the 79% of athletes that are graduating). So, to me, there doesnt seem to be much of an issue here. Maybe those resources would better be spent on the general student body to being up those graduation rates. Many SAs (particularly in the revenue sports) have many academic resources available to them that seem to be working. A student on an educational scholarship doesnt get tutors and mandatory study halls to help them succeed, they do it on their own. Thats not to say that these resources are wasted on Athletes, only that this is an added benefit that the SAs already have. Commercial Sponsorships: Absolutely. Dumb NCAA rule that doesnt work in 2014. Let the .1% of SAs who can get paid for who they are get paid for it. Due Process: Of course, all students should be held to standards that are fair. This doesnt only apply to SAs (though I am not sure asking all campuses to have the same punishments makes much sense). I have always found the "outrage" about the treatment of college athletes to be very strange. If the treatment that SAs get at schools is so bad why do they continue to participate? Sure many wouldnt be able to attend their school or afford it with out athletics, but most could (or could at a similar school). How can Gtown field a football team when none of them get scholarships? How can we have a baseball team when so few of them get full or partial scholarships? When something really sucks and people are not forced to participate in it, they tend to stop participating in it. But this hasnt happened with college athletics. Why then do we here so much about the "plight" of the college athlete? Well there are half a dozen 24 hour TV channels and countless radio networks and newspaper sections that cover this area. We dont have TV networks covering which college has the best Physics department so we never hear about it. There is a huge amount of time and money spent in the media covering this topic, but that doesnt mean that it really matters. And remember that most BCS athletics departments lose money. So where will the money come to support the higher resource demand for SAs (essentially more pay). Well hopefully from Coaches pay checks that are way out of balance with the market, but I doubt that will happen. Most likely we will see more non revenue sports get cut in favor of revenue sports which doesnt really help all SAs, just the ones that dont get cut. (notice that this is similar to what happens in other unionized industries where as pay rises, jobs are cut (or lost through attrition) and only the survivors benefit).
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Mar 29, 2014 9:20:52 GMT -5
One of the things Kain Colter complained about was that the Northwestern football program inflexibly controlled his schedule at the expense of his academic interests. He graduated with no problem but he could not take some courses he wanted so he could not pursue a pre-med concentration.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Mar 29, 2014 11:20:15 GMT -5
For me what happens down the road? For instance if i'm a highly recruited football player do I go to unionized Michigan State or to non union Alabama. Union laws and what they cover differ greatly from state to state.
|
|