Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Waltdods, post: 2159913, member: 2932"]
I don't understand why the source of the money matters.  That seems like a completely tangential point that is an obvious distraction from the actual question.  There is a lot of money, it comes from many places, and it goes to many places, but carefully avoids the actual players.  But obviously there is a ton more money in the system now than there was 30 or 50 years ago.  There might be one game a week on television in the '70s; now there are hundreds!

I also don't understand the demographic point you seem to want to make without saying.  What do the demographics have to do with anything?  The point is that everyone in this system gets to make money off it, except for the players.  That's true whatever the color or wealth of the player.

I think your last point is the most valid one, though I'd phrase it a little differently.  There is something about the image of the scholar-athlete that makes college sports in the United States something more meaningful than minor-league baseball.  And there is a risk that we upset the apple cart by admitting that "scholar-athlete" is an illusion.  I would agree that this militates against just opening things up for whatever sort of payments you want.  But the players already live a life that has virtually nothing in common with their classmates.  Allowing them to also make several thousand dollars a year doesn't seem to be a difference in kind.  It's just an argument that we need a line somewhere, not a particularly cogent one about where that line should be.  And when, on the other side, is the systematic screwing of thousands of young people to the benefit of a bunch of wealthy entrenched interests, this seems like an easy question.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?