Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Ward, post: 1752769, member: 1958"]
It really is an interesting topic and one that you would think some of the top labor economists would find fascinating. My guess is many of them are affiliated with universities who are quick to squash any studies or research on it for obvious reasons. It's a slippery slope because I agree the women's field hockey team and volleyball teams work real hard but unfortunately just because you work hard doesn't mean you're generating money to make a claim that you should be paid.

This is probably too basic to ever work and I invite others to poke holes in the concept but what if you just gave football and basketball teams a salary cap on what they could pay players on the team each year and installed a regulating party that was VERY strict on anyone providing compensation outside the "salary" for each player? First sign of stepping outside the lines you get hit with a postseason ban and if all the AD's and coaches respected that set up it could work. This helps erase some of the competitive advantages I mentioned in the endorsement compensation thread and also helps redistribute talent to a wider set of schools. Say UK only has $30k left to give but Tennessee has $45k maybe they decide to go to Tennessee. On the other side, maybe I'm down to North Carolina and Wake Forest and UNC has $25k left and Wake has $30-35k but I grew up a UNC fan or am willing to sacrifice that extra $5-10k to play at the school I like better. Schools with the resources can still use that advantage by pouring it into facilities and offering superior coaching than other schools. Same transfer rules.

Just throwing it out there as one approach or idea.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?