Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="shantydaze, post: 2593425, member: 666"] It is a very complex thought experiment to be sure as the NCAA rules are not the only reason revenue sport athletes are not "paid". First, lets assume each school can decide whether to provide additional compensation, over and above the cost of attendance scholarship. As a university president, I would have to determine what effect such an action and the requirements of Title IX would have on all other scholarship athletes. Next, would the additional compensation transform a student-athlete into an employee of the university, subjecting the school to liability for workers' compensation claims, work place violations, etc. Finally, how would such a change affect the non-profit status and mission of the university/athletic department. I think this may give some schools pause as to whether it makes sense to pay players. Lets say there were a way to work through some of these issues (perhaps licensing the university name to a third-party entity to field and operate a basketball/football program), how would this change the landscape of college athletics. Would it make sense and would it be possible to field non-revenue sports if there was significantly less money to fund these sports? Would Olympic training need to receive public funding as it could be losing its "minor league" system? What about those niche, quasi-revenue sports at some schools, lacrosse/hockey/baseball? As "employees" would revenue sport athletes need to sign employment contracts, would those contracts be guaranteed, and would they contain a non-compete? Finally, what kind of tensions would be created between the football and basketball programs? Football generates more money, but has more athletes that the money needed to be divided up between. The final piece of the puzzle is how such a change would affect the popularity of the sports. Viewership of pro sports is declining. Does the official transformation and public acknowledgement that football and basketball are professional sports cause people to watch less? I cheer for laundry. While I like seeing former players do well in the professional leagues, unless they are on a team I already root for, I certainly do not follow them. I think my level of fandom would decrease if the team was affiliated with the school in name only and I can't really put it into words as to why that would be. The other issue is that I don't think it would stop the corruption. To keep some competitiveness between the schools, there would probably have to be a salary cap put into place. Why wouldn't Kentucky or Duke or Alabama or USC still use bag men to sweeten the pot for these kids and their families? In the end, I think there would be a lot of unintended consequences that ultimately could kill the golden goose that is college athletics. [/QUOTE]

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