Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Fly Rodder, post: 1912470, member: 2133"]
C'mon now. The  biggest beneficiary of revenue generated by "student-athletes" says that they really aren't making any money.  Amazing.  Additionally, the linked spreadsheet shows that the single largest outlay is ... drumroll please, coaches and staff.  Tuition/grants are second.  Those two costs are totally controlled by the school both the actual value and the nominal value.  And the school sets the value tuition based on ... what? It's not reality.  There's not a single private school that doesn't factor in discounted tuition into their budgets.  They know that they need x students on full cost, y students on discounts to meet their revenue needs.  Projecting a little shortfall?  Offer more students at a discounted rate, squeeze a couple extra into classes and voila, extra revenue.

Scholarships aren't compensation, they're a benefit.  University employees get to take free classes.  That's not classified as salary.  My wife is an administrator at a university, she gets reciprocal tuition benefits for dependents (i.e., tuition).  We don't have dependents so that benefit is worthless to us.  You want us to be taxed on it?  Or, alternatively, every person who takes advantage of this version of tuition reimbursement to be taxed on it as revenue?  Not gonna happen.  Go into your supervisor's office, tell them you love making widgets for the company and you no longer want a salary.  They can pay you in widgets.  The company will trip over themselves to make that deal.

NCAA revenue athletics are a con.  Full stop.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?