U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-18-2018, 10:01 AM
 
9,439 posts, read 11,295,982 times
Reputation: 12638

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stanley-88888888 View Post
+ 1;
tennis and golf pros go to college ?

maybe all ncaa athletics could be minimum wage job. would that conflict with their amature status ?
Tiger Woods and Michelle Wie played at Stanford University.
Ricky Fowler went to Oklahoma State Univ.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-18-2018, 11:46 AM
 
Location: (six-cent-dix-sept)
4,025 posts, read 1,984,366 times
Reputation: 2495
Quote:
Originally Posted by City Guy997S View Post
Tiger Woods and Michelle Wie played at Stanford University.
Ricky Fowler went to Oklahoma State Univ.
that dont sound rite michelle competed in lpga since 14 years old.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2018, 02:32 PM
 
2,731 posts, read 3,780,488 times
Reputation: 2918
No. Students should not be compensated for playing a sport at university beyond the same types of tuition waivers and other fee waivers that are given for academic and artistic scholarships.

What the professional leagues need to do is set up lower level professional, or semi-professional, sporting leagues that feed into the topmost league. They have the money to support that. In other words, they should supply their own athlete pipelines.

This is what is done in Europe with futbol and other sports. School is for education, not sport, in most countries of the world. Only in the US of A do we have this b-tard college sport phenomenon.

Yes, it would go against the tradition of college sports, but if they start paying "student"-athletes, soon they will want to exempt the "students" from having to attend class and then what? Are they still "students"? The income paid to the "students" will be low initially, but then rise as programs have to bid higher "wages" to obtain the best athletes. Soon, the "students" won't have to get a degree since they are already making a livable wage and they won't need to attend class.

And I laughed when someone suggested paying the "students" minimum wage. Yeah, right. How long will that last before a "student" files a lawsuit over what he or she considers poverty or slave wages?

When the tail starts to wag the dog, cut off the tail and start over.

Last edited by Teak; 11-18-2018 at 02:45 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2018, 03:45 PM
 
3,149 posts, read 1,264,725 times
Reputation: 6289
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkalot View Post
In most schools Title IX has raised the cost to attend. Most states list their schools and how much more the regular students have to pay because of the sports that few play and fewer care about.

Universities should get to decide what sports they offer. If they profit from football and men's basketball they should be allowed to only offer those 2 sports. Then a small stipend could be included with the scholarship.

99% of students don't care if they have wrestling, rowing, or golf. It was not a factor in picking their school. Those sports do not enhance the college experience since students never go to their games, matches, or meets. Check out the coaching staff salaries for these sports. Not Saban money but much more than most people make.


Get rid of Title IX, at least the part that pertains to equal sports, and there would be money to pay the athletes. How much would depend on the success of the program.
Please, it has nothing to do with Title IX. Costs have gone up at public universities because states continue to contribute less and less to the cost of education, while asking students to foot more of the bill. Meanwhile, they are putting more into fancy facilities like dorms, dining halls, buildings, etc. When I was in school 20 years ago, we had dumpy shared dorms, most of which did not have AC. Now kids expect to live in dorms that are fancier than apartments many adults live in within the same community. The classrooms also have to be brand new instead of the old, creaking lecture halls. Schools can absolutely choose the sports they have. Many are Division II or Division III, many have few sports. They just have to offer sports for men and women.

Most of the kids who row, do wrestling, or play golf do not get that much of a scholarship at all... At best most of these students get a small scholarship and just enjoy playing the sport during their college years. A couple of the top students who are olympic/Tiger Woods caliber will probably get full scholarships, but the rest will probably end up having to pay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-18-2018, 06:32 PM
 
4,114 posts, read 1,679,641 times
Reputation: 13033
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
Please, it has nothing to do with Title IX. Costs have gone up at public universities because states continue to contribute less and less to the cost of education, while asking students to foot more of the bill. Meanwhile, they are putting more into fancy facilities like dorms, dining halls, buildings, etc. When I was in school 20 years ago, we had dumpy shared dorms, most of which did not have AC. Now kids expect to live in dorms that are fancier than apartments many adults live in within the same community. The classrooms also have to be brand new instead of the old, creaking lecture halls. Schools can absolutely choose the sports they have. Many are Division II or Division III, many have few sports. They just have to offer sports for men and women.

Most of the kids who row, do wrestling, or play golf do not get that much of a scholarship at all... At best most of these students get a small scholarship and just enjoy playing the sport during their college years. A couple of the top students who are olympic/Tiger Woods caliber will probably get full scholarships, but the rest will probably end up having to pay.

In truth, one of the biggest reasons is the administrative bloat in the average college. Since 2000, the number of administrative personnel per hundred students has risen by more than 60%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2018, 06:19 AM
 
Location: Arizona
5,613 posts, read 4,850,036 times
Reputation: 16624
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
Please, it has nothing to do with Title IX. Costs have gone up at public universities because states continue to contribute less and less to the cost of education, while asking students to foot more of the bill. Meanwhile, they are putting more into fancy facilities like dorms, dining halls, buildings, etc. When I was in school 20 years ago, we had dumpy shared dorms, most of which did not have AC. Now kids expect to live in dorms that are fancier than apartments many adults live in within the same community. The classrooms also have to be brand new instead of the old, creaking lecture halls. Schools can absolutely choose the sports they have. Many are Division II or Division III, many have few sports. They just have to offer sports for men and women.

Most of the kids who row, do wrestling, or play golf do not get that much of a scholarship at all... At best most of these students get a small scholarship and just enjoy playing the sport during their college years. A couple of the top students who are olympic/Tiger Woods caliber will probably get full scholarships, but the rest will probably end up having to pay.
I did not say Title IX was the sole reason. Did you look up your state and see how much those sports cost the average student? Did you look to see the salaries of the coaches of those sports? The other expenses for those sports.

Schools do not get to pick what sports they offer if they have to offer the same to both sexes. That isn't really a choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2018, 08:20 AM
 
Location: Georgia
3,556 posts, read 1,239,851 times
Reputation: 2682
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
If you are an employer and are paying someone $20/hr but they bring in $200/hr of value to the company, would you refuse to give them a raise to $25/hr because "they are already making $20/hr"?
The scholarship pays for whatever $ they are bringing in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2018, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Hartford CT
1,801 posts, read 1,943,949 times
Reputation: 3213
I'm not for paying athletes, but there definitely should be some changes in the NCAA and their so called rules for Student Athletes. I think going the route baseball and hockey has for all sports would be a great idea. Many athletes have no desire to be in school one second, and a football player or basketball player who has no interest in being a student is just wasting everyone's time. So the NFL and the NBA shouldn't use the NCAA as a feeder system and develop a farm system if need be (The NBA appears to be going in that direction. Also what law would be broken if a college athlete could make money as an individual off their celebrity? If a company wants to use them to endorse a product, what is the harm in that? In my opinion none. And this would be for all athletes! For example here in Connecticut, probably the most popular team in the state is the UCONN women's basketball team. Those young ladies could make some pretty good money endorsing businesses around the state.


Bottom line is something has to change. The Olympics did it, and survived, the NCAA can as well. Coaches making insane money, the NCAA making BILLIONS per year, and doing everything they can it seems to keep things status quo, while acting as if they care about a person's education and livelihood is a joke. Honestly, I would rather them give them nothing, and let them be real students and make their own money, then give scholarships to athletes who don't even care about an education.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2018, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
13,194 posts, read 9,301,836 times
Reputation: 9097
If you pay them, they're no longer amateurs. There, fixed it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-19-2018, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Phila Pa
2,559 posts, read 1,801,056 times
Reputation: 956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raptor76 View Post
I'm not for paying athletes, but there definitely should be some changes in the NCAA and their so called rules for Student Athletes. I think going the route baseball and hockey has for all sports would be a great idea. Many athletes have no desire to be in school one second, and a football player or basketball player who has no interest in being a student is just wasting everyone's time. So the NFL and the NBA shouldn't use the NCAA as a feeder system and develop a farm system if need be (The NBA appears to be going in that direction. Also what law would be broken if a college athlete could make money as an individual off their celebrity? If a company wants to use them to endorse a product, what is the harm in that? In my opinion none. And this would be for all athletes! For example here in Connecticut, probably the most popular team in the state is the UCONN women's basketball team. Those young ladies could make some pretty good money endorsing businesses around the state.


Bottom line is something has to change. The Olympics did it, and survived, the NCAA can as well. Coaches making insane money, the NCAA making BILLIONS per year, and doing everything they can it seems to keep things status quo, while acting as if they care about a person's education and livelihood is a joke. Honestly, I would rather them give them nothing, and let them be real students and make their own money, then give scholarships to athletes who don't even care about an education.
In reference to Baseball, it should be noted in the past several years well over half the guys drafted by ML teams have come out of college versus directly out of HS. College players move through the minor league levels faster and have greater odds going to the Majors. As a retired college coach I always recommend HS kids go the college route, unless they are good enough to draft in the early rounds. I just wish the NCAA would raise the amount of scholarships allowed and the schools would fully fund them.

As far as Basketball, the NBA will eventually do away with the one and done, probably as part of their next "Collective Bargaining Agreement", and will expand their G-league program.

Paying collegiate athletes? What stirs the debate for the most part is the amount of money being made by the schools as well as the coaching salaries. Of course some seem to ignore the amount of money schools put into "state of the art facilities" and stadiums these monies are buying. As far as the coaching, it is all relative. Coaches are a big part of developing these athletes and earn every cent. The schools paying top level Football and Basketball Coaches are competing with the NFL and NBA for their services.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top