Athletes being "paid"

[PhDeac]

It's the idea that people doing something that makes money should get paid.

 

[DeacinBama]

I could see the service academies doing it. Set a uniform midshipman rate for everyone (not just athletes) and they're good to go. I think I'm correct in saying that if they stay in the service their "career" date is day one at the academies.

You do realize that your first sentence is exactly what is already happening, and has been happening for decades, at the service academies? Kind if crazy to use service academies as an example for anything when 1) sports scholarships don't exist at these institutions and 2) they've been "paying" their players in all sports for years.

Regarding the second sentence - no. Graduates get a few months of credible service, and there may be some added benefits on the backend. But time for rank, pay, and retirement effectively begins with graduation and commissioning.

 

[TheReff]

It's the idea that people doing something that makes money should get paid.

The players are getting paid Ph...they are getting paid with the opportunity of getting a great college education for free. Nobody is holding a gun to their head to make them play football or basketball. They can go to college on their own if they would like. Nobody is making them go to Alabama to play football or Wake Forest for that matter.

In this country, unless our president changes it like he has everything else by Executive Office edict, going to college is not a God given right, like it seems that Medicare & Social Security are. Getting a full college scholarship to play a D1 college sport is a privilege and the opportunity to get something far more than just the chance at playing pro ball. And that is the way most of these athletes ought to look at it sinceonly about 1% of any of them ever make it to the NBA, NFL or MLB level. They ought to take their opportunity seriously and realize they are STUDENT-athlete first and go to class and get their degree for their future after college.

 

[Lohengrin]

What about the gate? Should college and HS players always get a "fair share" of that, since it's making money? It's been a source of revenue since the early years of sport. Amateur athletes do not get paid, anywhere, and they never have. Sure, they get a free education if they're scholarship worthy but that has always been a perk, not compensation (although it has great value).

This payment of players seems to me to be a move by the Alabamas and Southern Cals to flex their financial muscle to distance themselves from the competition who can't afford to pay athletes. Whether Wake drops out of the ACC or not, they can't afford costs like this. We need a de-escalation of the cost to compete, not an enhancement of the arms race.

 

[WFcatamount22]

Nail on the head. I don't watch pro sports AT ALL. College sports, to this point, have been about pure competition by the athletes unsullied by money -- excluding the expectation of future earnings. There is no earthly reason why this should change.

If you think college athletics are not corrupted by money you are delusional.

Paying the revenue generating athletes is the morally right thing to do. There is no reason why admin's/NCAA/Schools should be getting filthy rich while the players who put their bodies and future livelihoods on the line get nothing.

Athletes in non revenue sports should get nothing but a scholarship. If your not generating revenue you do not deserve to get paid.

 

[deac85]

I'm always amazed by how many high school athletes pick mediocre academic schools instead of taking advantage of a free ride at Duke, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, etc. that can be worth $300k+. I'm talking about players who probably will never play professionally.

 

[coredeac]

I'm always amazed by how many high school athletes pick mediocre academic schools instead of taking advantage of a free ride at Duke, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, etc. that can be worth $300k+. I'm talking about players who probably will never play professionally.

YES! Most marginal high school students with exceptional athletic skills are just dying to spend four years having the living shit kicked out of themselves in the classroom!

And, I would like to add that charging $300k for a four-year undergraduate degree is borderline criminal.

 

[Lohengrin]

If you think college athletics are not corrupted by money you are delusional.

Paying the revenue generating athletes is the morally right thing to do. There is no reason why admin's/NCAA/Schools should be getting filthy rich while the players who put their bodies and future livelihoods on the line get nothing.

Athletes in non revenue sports should get nothing but a scholarship. If your not generating revenue you do not deserve to get paid.

OMG, people have some kind of misguided ideology about this stuff. Sure there's money in college athletics; but it doesn't mean that the players have to become a part of it. Just because there's money doesn't mean everyone deserves a share. There is a political agenda about this and I find no merit to that agenda. It's not enough to say "money --> give me a cut". There's no end once you take the first step, and it's the end of college athletics as we know it. Very few fans pay to see named players, even in the pros. They go to see the name on the front of the jersey. Take any one of our players out of a Wake jersey and WGAF?

 

[PhDeac]

It's not morally right to pay someone for doing a job with money?

 

[Lohengrin]

It's not morally right to pay someone for doing a job with money?

Not when you're an amateur athlete. It's not a job. It's neither morally right, nor morally wrong. They're students playing a game and getting an inducement to play at a particular school. In the Ivy League they don't even get athletic scholarships. How is an Ivy League athlete different from a Wake athlete? Once you "agree" that college, or high school, athletes "deserve" to get paid for playing a game they love, you can't stop it eventually from becoming a professional league. And that is just wrong. The scholarship isn't compensation for a job, it's a perk; an inducement. The increased amount of money made by colleges now due to TV revenue doesn't change the time-honored equation for amateur sports.

 

[deac85]

YES! Most marginal high school students with exceptional athletic skills are just dying to spend four years having the living shit kicked out of themselves in the classroom!

And, I would like to add that charging $300k for a four-year undergraduate degree is borderline criminal.

Some good parenting would help a 17 year old above -average volleyball player make the right decision and pick the good school.
You are right about the cost - At $62k a year, Wake resembles your comment

 

[Milhouse]

I remember Eric Dickerson telling me he came close to taking a pay cut to go from SMU to the NFL. I think he was only about half joking.

when did he tell you this? were you guys having dinner?

i mean, that is an old joke. who knew it originated in an actual conversation between you and eric dickerson. that is fascinating

 

[sailordeac]

Eric Dickerson told me he never joked about money.

 

[BeachBumDeac]

OMG, people have some kind of misguided ideology about this stuff. Sure there's money in college athletics; but it doesn't mean that the players have to become a part of it. Just because there's money doesn't mean everyone deserves a share. There is a political agenda about this and I find no merit to that agenda. It's not enough to say "money --> give me a cut". There's no end once you take the first step, and it's the end of college athletics as we know it. Very few fans pay to see named players, even in the pros. They go to see the name on the front of the jersey. Take any one of our players out of a Wake jersey and WGAF?

Who do you think the people paying that money are paying to see? The coaches on the sideline? The contractors who built the lavish locker rooms?

 

[BillBrasky]

I'm cool with it as long as all the non-revenue athletes start paying their own way, plus a percentage of whatever they cost the school. #capitalism

 

[Lohengrin]

Who do you think the people paying that money are paying to see? The coaches on the sideline? The contractors who built the lavish locker rooms?

They're paying to see any players wearing the jersey of their team. But this line of inquiry is based on a flawed premise: That players are only in it for the money. They're amateurs by definition. That's how it's always been. Amateur means playing only for the love of the sport. If you want to get paid, go professional -- if you can. If the pros won't draft you out of H.S., then that's a problem with the pros, not college. College isn't a minor league, even if the pros treat it that way.

 

[BeachBumDeac]

They're paying to see any players wearing the jersey of their team. But this line of inquiry is based on a flawed premise: That players are only in it for the money. They're amateurs by definition. That's how it's always been. Amateur means playing only for the love of the sport. If you want to get paid, go professional -- if you can. If the pros won't draft you out of H.S., then that's a problem with the pros, not college. College isn't a minor league, even if the pros treat it that way.

Not true. They are paying to see GOOD players wearing the jersey of their team. Look at ticket sales for losing teams vs. winning teams.

 

[Junebug]

It's not morally right to pay someone for doing a job with money?

It's not a job. They are playing a game. If the players want to make money, nothing is precluding them from quitting the team and getting a paying job.

Yes, we pay professional athletes, but that's only because professional teams/leagues want to attract the best players for economic reasons. Morality has nothing to do with it.

Besides, we are already paying college athletes. If it helps conceptualize it, think of it as if the schools weren't providing athletes a scholarship but, instead, are paying them the exact monetary amount of tuition and expenses. That's compensation on any definition of the term.

 

[PhDeac]

Colleges don't want to attract the best players for economic reasons?

If scholarships are pay, why do the best athletes often go to the public schools that "pay" the least?

 

[Shorty]

If we start paying athletes, why would they go to class at all? If they're paid, then it most definitely becomes a job. Spanish and Calculus would just get in the way of doing their job.