Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="reedny, post: 2593879, member: 1423"] A couple of points. First and foremost, nothing you've posted convinces me that, at its core, the relationship between college athletes and host schools is occupational rather than educational. All D-1 colleges are NFP -- essentially untaxed charities that are allowed to exist because of the importance society places on education. Students - including student athletes - are there primarily to learn. This primary purpose isn't erased because a few NBA aspirants at a few schools claim they have greater "value" and don't like going to class. Second, even at the "sham" schools, there's no shocking injustice, although the relationship admittedly has some occupational aspects. Sleazy programs like UK are nothing like SU because they operate like de facto semi-pro clubs. Education is secondary (if not entirely absent), and millions of dollars are earned by everyone connected with the program, except the athletes - most of whom who are too young for pro ball (that is a CBA, not a college rule). The problem is, even in these cases viewed only through a monetary lens, SA's still receive something equal to or greater than their "services". They get health care, room, board, training, high level coaching and tremendous TV exposure. If they have greater "value", I haven't seen it. Bazely opted out of school and there's no endorsement money. His "value" consists of an agent loan. GL players make $36k. So even in monetary terms, the suppressed value argument is weak and the system that most needs reform is the NBA CBA (the rule that prohibits kids from going directly from HS to the NBA/GL), not college. But lets get away from the one-and-dones - the exceptions - and back to the vast majority of schools and SA's. For all of them, amateur competition is not a "job", it's an ancillary part of an educational experience. Just because people will pay to see them compete doesn't mean they're transformed into employees. I've paid to see a HS FB game, and a LL playoff game. Does that mean 10 year olds have "market value", that they're being exploited, or that they're under-compensated workers because they're only given a uniform for playing first base instead of a share of the gate revenue? Of course not. In the same way, the "value" of college sports is precisely that it's STUDENTS competing - amateur athletes who are happy to receive an education instead of a paycheck. It's a bargain with benefits to each party (compensation), but only in an abstract way. Paying players cash and turning the bargain into an employment relationship would contradict the whole purpose of the endeavor (education), and create a far more corrupt system by monetizing every aspect of it. That would be a disservice to Universities and SA's who chose amateur competition. So the unfairness and injustice you perceive are illusory. And turning the amateur model on its head invites more corruption and sours the entire enterprise ... which is now more popular than ever. And btw, UK sucks and so does pay pal. The last thing I want to model college sports on is the cesspool he's running in Lexington. [/QUOTE]

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