Quote:
Originally Posted by Parti Rhinocéros
I am on the side of paying student athletes. These kids are cash cows for the schools, the networks, the advertisers, and the NCAA. Granted, I would have loved to have been a full scholarship in college for my athletic ability but it's a full time job for these kids. Give them a stipend for $1,000-$2,000 per semester in addition to room and board, books, and tuition - they're certainly making millions for everyone else.
|
Between Division 1 and 1-AA there are 238 schools that have football teams. Only 16 of them make a profiit. Can't remember the exact number for men's basketball but I think 20 out of 300 turn a profit. Only women's sports that make a profit are UCONN and Tenn in basketball, Utah in gymnastics and Penn State in volleyball. 4 or 5 baseball teams make money. All of that money gets kicked into non-revenue sports.
If the schools paid it's athletes cash they would quickly eliminate athletics.
Even if they were able to pay them we would still have problems. Let's say they get a $1000 semester allowance. Boosters and agents are paying more than that right now. Is 1000 enough? In a year or so they will want 1500, then 2000 and so on.
Look at the Big Ten. Those schools will pull in about 32 million combined for bowl games this year. Those exact same schools will be awarded 6 BILLION in research grants this year.
The graduate students and research professors do far far more than any athlete or coach as far as economic support. It aint even close. The grad student doing research doesn't get paid. 32 million compared to 6 billion. The grad student should be the one getting rich, not the athlete.