Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Alsacs, post: 3115870, member: 652"] If I was writing the bill I would say players from sports that turn a profit would entitled to some of the profits. The problem with this it would it would trigger Title IX lawsuits because not many if any female collegiate sports programs turn a profit. I don't think the kids that participate in swimming, track and field, cross country, soccer, tennis should be compensated by their colleges because football and basketball bring in millions of dollars. The football and basketball players are the ones that get treated like indentured servants. The compromise is the CA Bill which allows these athletes to make money off their likeness and endorsements while maintaining their eligibility. The marketplace would dictate what player got what. Another problem is by paying the athletes you are turning them into employees and union/collective bargaining would become part of collegiate athletes. We would see lockouts/strikes like in professional sports. I believe these kids in revenue sports deserve more its just if you pay the football/basketball and don't pay the sports I listed above that is a violation of the 14th amendment equal protection clause. Schools could probably pay the athletes in those sports and still turn major profits but if you start paying ALL SCHOLARSHIP athletes those profits aren't sustainable. Capping coaching salaries sounds good but the NCAA can't tell the schools how much their coaches can make. Syracuse and most private schools don't typically release their coaches salaries because they want the information secret. The CA Bill is good for the players. The NY Bill would work if its just for sports that turn a profit or it would affect these nonrevenue sports. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?