"Schooled: The Price of College Sports"

Haven't seen it, but "slavery" seems at first glance to be a rather hyperventilated term to describe football and basketball players (which I assume are the focus of the film) receiving full academic scholarships, who also in the case of most larger programs, reside in student residential suites, not Frosh dorms, have access to training tables, academic tutors, etc.

Not saying the NCAA and the Universities are saints by any means, but slavery?  Every full scholarship D1 athlete is actually presented with a tremendous "opportunity."

Thanks for the suggestion Rich.  I'll check it out, and get back to you.

Did you read Paul Woody's commentary this AM in the Richmond Times Dispatch?  He's basically saying if you recruit and enroll anyone at your school it is the schools responsibility to educate and graduate them.  No exceptions.  Interesting perspective.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/s...c9-e79edb1cf090.html

Fenway.....I know you didn't make the statement but it looks like you are in support of the statement so I am going to ask you for your opinion.  Can you explain to me how you plan on educating and graduating a person with NO EXCEPTIONS, if they don't want to do it themselves?

I think Woody's article is saying the colleges are responsible for educating those they accept whether they are athletes, musicians, artists, etc.  No exceptions to whom the college makes an attempt to help succeed.  If one of those walks of life mentioned above decides they don't want to be educated that is another matter entirely.  I can't hang that on the college if they've made every reasonable effort to educate a student they've admitted.  JMO.

A major theme running through the documentary is about "amateurism".

Would you kick an English student out of school for publishing an article in a magazine and getting paid for it?

If you think that all of the football & basketball players are attending certain schools for the education then you may need to pull your head of the sand.  

The NCAA's answer to why players can't get paid… "Because they are amateurs."

The NCAA's answer to why players are amateurs… "Because they are not paid."

Really?  

No idea what the answer is.  But I bet you in the next 10 years things will look different.  

Rich

www.PlayInSchool.com

If you are saying that football and basketball players from major programs who turn a profit should be paid...i think you have an arguement. The obvious problem is that no other sport makes a profit, all run to the best of my knowledge run at a loss and if you pay the men in 2 sports you would be forced to pay all the athletes including the women for all sports...maybe they set up a super conference of paid colleges for the top 25 or 35 schools but outside of that i don't see it.

It isn't going to happen in the near future - at least in my opinion.

You have touched on another important topic….

The answer is HARD….

So instead of trying to find it...

We do nothing.

i honestly don't think there is a major problem. at most schools for most sports the kids are getting a good deal. I mean really how can a baseball player, swimmer, field hockey, or cross country runner feel like the deals they get are unfair? the vast majority of the athletes are students first who have worked very hard for a free or reduced education - compound over a life tie it is a valuable tool if used properly.

if you are there to play football or basketball only as your next step to the pros and it doesn't work out for you...well nobody forced you to come. if you go to a school where you just can't keep the standards because you liked the team or coach...well you made a poor choice.

You are right.

It is a very small percentage of the college students that are the products being sold in a multi-billion dollar industry.  Those are the once possibly being exploited.

How is it that the highest paid state employee in every single state is a college football or basketball coach?  

But if that same coach buys a meal for his player because he can't afford to eat that is an NCAA violation?

I'm not necessarily saying we need to pay any or all players.  I do however think there are some rules that need to be reevaluated.  Or perhaps the NCAA itself needs to be reevaluated by the participating schools.

Some thought & discussion is in order.

Rich

www.PlayInSchool.com

Here is an example of a story that grinds my gears.  The NCAA at work...

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/57680744/

few comments above in bold - i don't think you and i are that far apart, i just have a hard time feeling sorry for a kid who gets a free ride and doesn't take advantage of it. I know sooooo many HS kids working their asses off (in calss and off) for the hope of being able to play at any level school while paying tuition to do it.

I am well aware life is not always fair but the knife can cut both ways.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/st...ing-join-labor-union

Story posted today...the kids are trying....

wow, this is going to be a crazy ride - the NLRB and union organizions....LOL what could go wrong. LOL it won't be long for the Mob has control of the NCAA - and we will be wanting the good old days of the BCS back!!!

Honestly - bad is the only potential result of this - there is no upside.

Time for Roothog to get on here and explain why this is great!!

Old School - 

So you think guys like Arian Foster are just lying about going hungry while in school?

Remember, the athlete has NO leverage.  If they speak out while in school, they are gone.

I agree they get an awesome opportunity at an education.  But there is a long way between not having to pay for school out of pocket & having money to pay rent or eat.  

Watch the documentary.   

Rich

i can only tell you that I have 2 nieces that are or were D1 (patriot league), i have 2 clients one son current D1 baseball (half ride) one girl ACC field hockey 2011 grad, i have a nephew who is currently playing midmajor basketball in the south...everyone of those kids is treated like very well, from rooming, to travel, to aids, traveling tutors, meals etc....so if Adrian Foster was hungry....well i have to assume there is more to the story.

The argument against paying college athletes is it would require more funding from the athletic department at the expense of other non revenue generating sports. Then there's the argument is an athlete for a poor family playing a non revenue sport any different than a similar athlete playing a revenue generating sport.

What I don't like is the NCAA licensing the rights to images of college athletes to game companies, selling game jersies with athletes names and pocketing the revenue (the O'Bannion case).

I just watched it, and thought it was very well done.  A few years ago, I'd read Taylor Branch's article in the Atlantic http://www.theatlantic.com/debates/college-sports/ and I thought it was very insightful.   I respect Jay Bilas's opinion a lot and I think he offers  well balanced thoughts on the topic.  Sonny Viccaro's story is an interesting one as he was part of the system that led to college coaches rich shoe contracts.  Branch's point about these players having no rights, and the documentary's point of no representation has really stuck with me.  I have a real problem with that.  One gentlemen commented that we'll look back at this in 20+ years and wonder what the heck were we thinking by allowing the NCCA current policies.  I agree.

PS - In addition to Netflix, you can stream it for free on Amazon if you are a Prime member.

I heard there is a University Football team that is trying to Unionize. 

Yeah, it'd be terrible if the people upon whom the entire NCAA cash cow is built had any say in how they were compensated or treated.

i don't understand how people can understand that this is so much bigger then football and basketball. this involves the government, title xi, all of the various levels of play...you are talking about a very few schools in the big picture of things.

if they choose to start a super conference outside of the existing levels of play that will be a whole different conversation but the NCAA - it is just not gonna happen.

it will only lead to more money and more forms of corruption! who is going to determine what the players? who should get what, do all schools get them same? how about all players? who is going to keep the schools in check or do you assume that now that they are able to play the players some unknown amount of money nobody will have the need to cheat to get more better players...

I hate the NCAA but paying kids will only make things worse...what could wrong with a bunch of young college kids with money running around campus...sounds like a great idea to me!!

I will reiterate...

Just because this is a HARD discussion doesn't mean that there should be NO discussion.

The "answer" to the problem will not come easy.  But realizing, admitting & identifying that there IS a problem is essential.  

Rich

www.PlayInSchool.com

Paying college football and basketball players, which seems inevitable, means to me that an entirely new model is needed and coming. I can see the college football that we know today migrating to a fully professional minor league... Maybe still loosely associated with schools, maybe not. We may tell our grand kids how minor league football was once part of universities, which may just be a strange side note by then. Ditto basketball. No idea how schools can or will let go of any of the massive income steam, other than that they simply may not have any choice. Whatever "modest" payment system gets introduced initially, it will escalate to market parity quickly. The schools have the facilities and infrastructure, so maybe that's how they continue to participate financially long term. It will take time to shake out but big changes are obviously coming. Who knows, maybe it's a great thing... maybe actual college football and basketball, played by actual four year student-athletes, will resurface as a result at some point?

The five conference super-conference teams should probably cut to the chase and not just separate from the NCAA... but also set it up as a professional league from the start where the schools own or partially own the teams.

First, they're not even talking about pay at this point.

Second, exactly why would paying anyone for work they're doing that makes their employer great big piles of cash, be a problem?  Your logic could just as easily be extended to college students who aren't athletes and work.  We wouldn't want to pay them either, lest they have money while they're "running around campus".  For that matter, maybe it would be better if every business could just offer their employees room and board and not actually have to pay them for the work they do as long as they do that.

NCAA football and basketball are, in many instances, minor leagues for the NFL and NBA. No one seems to have an issue with HS kids getting paid to play MiLB.

My son's HS coaches are heavily invested in making sure he and his teammates are successful academically as well as athletically, and no one really views HS athletics as a money-making endeavor.  That's not true of the NCAA, and if it were, we likely wouldn't see athletes attempting to organize.

Please – it is going to end up with pay. You don’t really believe it won’t – they already get everything else.

Their work is being paid for via a scholarship…now if you want to discount that fine but don’t try to say they aren’t being paid. If they aren’t students and should be there shame on them for doing and shame on the school for allowing it. If you want to say we have a problem with the system fine – I might even agree but don’t try to sell me that they aren’t paid. Your argument should be they are not able to take advantage of the opportunity

You obviously don’t remember being a kid or want to hide your head in the sand but young people with money at college (especially ones who have never had money) bad things are going to happen. I know for a fact when I was young cash in the pocket never let to good things…LOL but it did lead to lots of fun!!!

My father used to say to me “nothing good happens after midnight” think about how true that is – money just adds to the good times!!

I have an idea for youths that aren’t college type students or that want to be professional…try the NBA D league, the Canadian football or Arena football….there are options out there. People may not like them but they are there. College athletics are one not the minors leagues and shouldn’t be treated as them.

Oh and I do agree that the schools themselves should be held accountable to standards…they are bunch of hypocrites as well.

Unfortunately in our current system NCAA football & basketball ARE the minor leagues.  

Want to know how many CFL players are in the NFL?  15  http://www.tsn.ca/cfl/feature/?id=76916

Alabama will have more than 15 players drafted this year.  

Rich

www.PlayInSchool.com

i agree but if the players are being tasken advantage of, and they are being treated unfairly and the the nasty mean schools are not willing tp up the pay...they have other options. if half the kids going to the SEC, Big 10 and all the others went to play in the CFL i bet the numbers would change very fast - correct?

The kids want to be there, it is the best option for them if they want to go pro or not they need to stop bitching and enjoy the ride - it is a great deal for all parties and if they actually decide to study it is possible that the day the sign up is greatest single event of their lives!!! But they have to take advantage of being there.

WTF it is fairly simple.

I love that idea that money is somehow bad for a 21 year old college senior, but not for a 21 year old college graduate. People with money do stupid shit no matter how old they are (as do people without), that's a ridiculous argument against paying people who are making their employers (even if you don't want to call it that) lots of money, whether they're NCAA athletes or MBAs.

And, no, this doesn't inevitably lead to paying college athletes (not that I think that would necessarily be a terrible plan).  If the NCAA was interested in the well being of its athletes, they'd have guaranteed scholarships and there'd be real protections in place to make sure that kids were getting the educations they were promised (see recent UNC news). Since we're already quite far down the road of exploiting the athletes, I'd say the NCAA has it's work cut out to reestablish the ideal of amateur college athletics, and I don't really have any faith that they can (or even want to).

No doubt about that. But I think the middle man is about to get cut out (unless they adapt significantly), middle man being the major college program schools. Let's say a super conference emerges as has been heavily rumored the past few years... Either one that pays players, or some sort of pro minor league. How would that then impact recruiting at mid major football programs? Student athletes would still seek traditional college scholarship route at a typical mid major or non super-conf school; a lot of other HS standouts who couldn't care less about a college education will naturally go the paid super conference/minor league route. And even if all schools went to a pay-for-players model, the reality will quickly be that the super-conference teams will pay significantly more.

The NCAA is basically OPEC.  They have cartel control over a valuable asset that effectively must deal with them in order to proceed beyond college athletics in basketball and football.

Note that MLB has a similar cartel-like control due to the draft, but it at least actually has to nominally pay it's minor leaguers in order to entice them not to take advantage of other opportunities.

You want to see a real free-market solution to this problem, do away with the draft in professional sports and give the labor on which these leagues, and the NCAA, are built some freedom and see who ends up with the money.

There are several universities around the Midwest that do not have football.  Suppose a school decide that they will not agree to union contracts.  Suppose that they cancel football.  These players think that the university needs them.  Well, many don't.  People will still attend many of those institutions for he education.  I know that is a preposterous statement that most of the student body is there for an education.  While the school may suffer some from the Saturday crowds, they will be able to get back to their original job which was to push academia.  I say more power to any school that decides to do this.  

Per these players, since they do not receive payment and are now attempting to unionize, if the university decides to remove their scholarships are these school guilty of any federal laws?  I understand the opposite when money is paid to employee and they then want to unionize.  What about the Right to work law states?  Would it be possible that such moves by athletes and given the seriousness of football in some states like Alabama, could the state move to enact right to work law legislation?  

Man, a whole can of worms will be opened.  Per my own opinion, if these athletes don't like their compensation, quit and get a real job like I had to do.  Work in a factory midnight shift for 10 years to pay and earn that degree.  

If football wasn't a net plus (in direct profit, alumni donations, or otherwise) to the schools, they'd cut it now.  That they don't is an indication that it's worth something to the schools that have it. Should the players successfully organize and change the math that the schools use to decide on how to organize their athletics, that might become an issue, we'll see.

Your position on athletes can quit if they don't like it is precisely why they're organizing. You're free to quit your job if you don't like it, and go to a competitor, or ask your boss for a raise, or otherwise make use of your talents while getting paid for them.  NCAA athletes do not have that freedom, at least with regards to their athletic talents, without jumping through NCAA and other hoops. If you're injured on the job, there are regulations that exist that prevent your employer from simply telling you to pack your things and go without compensating you for the injury.

Or are you arguing that in all employer/employee relationships that the employer should have unilateral power to set the conditions of employment?

there is no employer/employee relationship...it is a student and school. they are free to quit and get a job at any point!!

The existence of an employer/employee relationship is at issue here, and is a matter of law, that will likely spend years in litigation if it gets that far.

That athletes are artificially constrained from using their athletic talents to seek employment thanks in part to agreements between the NFL/NBA and NCAA is likely to work against the NCAA's position.

If your potential employers worked together to force you to work for free to prove that you were worth hiring, and forced you to bear the costs of potential career ending injuries without offering you an alternative, what would you do?

As an employer I have to say that I agree with this point.  I am not sure that it pertains to this specific conversation, but as far as the employer/employee relationship goes, I as the employer have taken ALL the risk to establish my company.  The employee agrees to the compensation package during the interview process.  There is no reason to expect that you should get to change the rules after the relationship exists.  If you as the employee do not like whatever the situation is, you can and are free to leave for greener pastures.  I, as the owner, cannot just pack up and leave.  I have EVERYTHING invested.  These athletes are getting the opportunity for a free or greatly reduced education.  I do agree that they work extremely hard and do make the universities a lot of money.  But the athlete get TONS of perks outside the cost of their education.  They have access to tutors, free clothing, shoes, etc.  They will also in many instances have an advantage in the work environment after school if they attend an in-state university.  At some point people should appreciate what they have and not look to take from others because they feel entitled.  JMO

Do you work with other potential employers of your workers to ensure that they can't switch employers freely?

If one of your workers gets hurt after starting working for you, do you fire them and replace them with someone healthy?

If your best worker (or 10 best) comes to you and asks for a raise, do you tell them to pound sand with the knowledge that they can't go work for one of your competitors without your permission and they can't make as much as you're paying them if they choose to switch industries?

Do you voluntarily refrain from recruiting your competitors' best workers?

Do you sell souvenirs using your workers names and images without their consent and keep all the profits?

Do you give your workers "free" clothing and merchandise for which you're paid by the clothing/merchandise manufacturer?

Do you solicit donations from your successful former workers to pay your salary, or those of the people you employee to manage your workers?

....there are no workers..... there are no paychecks (at least legally)...no employment agreement.... taxes withheld...it is not a job...it is a school...i am typing with big spaces to let that seep into your head....this is not an employee of the school....go back to sleep now....

You're welcome to your opinion, but people well versed in labor law have suggested that it's far from that cut and dried.

http://digital.law.washington....262/81washlrev71.pdf

I'd also add, that if there's no employer/employee relationship, what is the purpose of providing scholarships in the first place?

i am tired of this conversation, good luck.