Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Shrmdougluvr, post: 2154018, member: 396"]
Then they should go pro if the opportunity is available.  Take a kid like Dontae Strickland.  My guess is giving him hardships growing up, he wouldn't have even had a sniff of higher education if he couldn't ball.  But he can, and seems like a good kid too.  So he had three options: 1.  finish up hs and get a job; 2.  come to college, not pay a cent, play ball, and leave with your degree (and let's not pretend these kids saying i played football at school x doesn't give them an advantage during the hiring process); or 3.  go pro (when the time is right), which likely will never actually be an option for him.

To me, what ALL4Su was implying is that it's shortsighted to not see that #2, for the vast majority of college athletes, even  in revenue producing sports, is far and away the best option.

I know there are hardships, but lets not act like the inability to buy a playstation is one of them.  The only real argument for paying these kids is "coach x makes 5 mil a year and the department clears 20 mil, it's unfair not to spread the wealth to the players who make it possible."  I'm ok with that argument as its about fairness, but it's also disingenuous, given the perks of being a scholarship athlete on a revenue producing sport.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?