Doyel: Time to pay college football players -- changing times, money say so
Doyel is a d-bag.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way, we can begin to discuss his article. I find it odd that he thinks it's so important to pay the players but doesn't discuss at all how he'd go about doing such a thing. I'm in favor of paying players, but not if it means cutting other sports or bankrupting athletic departments.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way, we can begin to discuss his article. I find it odd that he thinks it's so important to pay the players but doesn't discuss at all how he'd go about doing such a thing. I'm in favor of paying players, but not if it means cutting other sports or bankrupting athletic departments.
People can argue all they want that a full-ride scholarship isn't the bargain it once was. The average graduate who owes over $35,000 upon graduation is going to listen to that argument for all of 5 seconds before walking away in disgust. It's a great deal. In fact, I would argue even a better deal now than a decade ago.
And there's no way such a decision gets limited to a single sport. You open the wallets for football players and you're going to have to do the same for the swimmers, golfers, rowers and every other minor sport being offered. If universities wouldn't do it voluntarily the courts would eventually make it so. Which means, as Clark points out, universities start dropping sports faster than supermodels dropping boyfriends on a millionaires' singles cruise. And not out of greed...many because they would simply have to. It would, in essence, end up being the money from those scholarships diverted to pay the extra incentives for football players and other "money sport" athletes.
I'm not opposed to restructuring the way student athletes are compensated. But it would need to be a total reworking of the system from the ground up. Doyel and the "It's time to pay them" crowd are oversimplifying the issue to a ridiculous degree. Start offering cash for play and it absolutely changes everything. Whether the talking heads acknowledge that or not doesn't make it any less true.
Start paying college athletes? Fine. But rather than writing quick hitting articles that make it seem like a small adjustment to the status quo, let's be honest enough to evaluate that decision with some level of truth. It very well could usher in the single biggest change to college athletics, ever. It could make Title IX look like a bylaw tacked on to the end of the rulebook as an afterthought. And, yes, I know people said the same about Title IX..."You'll ruin college athletics!" And it didn't.
I'm not saying it WOULD change college athletics into something unrecognizable by today's standards, I'm saying that the potential is absolutely there to do so. And I have to question the credibility of journalists who fail to acknowledge that potential. If it ever occurs everyone better walk into it with a well thought-out plan and eyes wide open, ready to handle the unforseen consequences that would certainly follow...perhaps minor, perhaps enormous.
Then again, large organizations like the NCAA are known for effective rollouts of massive, paradigm-shifting programs. I'm sure it would be fine...
And there's no way such a decision gets limited to a single sport. You open the wallets for football players and you're going to have to do the same for the swimmers, golfers, rowers and every other minor sport being offered. If universities wouldn't do it voluntarily the courts would eventually make it so. Which means, as Clark points out, universities start dropping sports faster than supermodels dropping boyfriends on a millionaires' singles cruise. And not out of greed...many because they would simply have to. It would, in essence, end up being the money from those scholarships diverted to pay the extra incentives for football players and other "money sport" athletes.
I'm not opposed to restructuring the way student athletes are compensated. But it would need to be a total reworking of the system from the ground up. Doyel and the "It's time to pay them" crowd are oversimplifying the issue to a ridiculous degree. Start offering cash for play and it absolutely changes everything. Whether the talking heads acknowledge that or not doesn't make it any less true.
Start paying college athletes? Fine. But rather than writing quick hitting articles that make it seem like a small adjustment to the status quo, let's be honest enough to evaluate that decision with some level of truth. It very well could usher in the single biggest change to college athletics, ever. It could make Title IX look like a bylaw tacked on to the end of the rulebook as an afterthought. And, yes, I know people said the same about Title IX..."You'll ruin college athletics!" And it didn't.
I'm not saying it WOULD change college athletics into something unrecognizable by today's standards, I'm saying that the potential is absolutely there to do so. And I have to question the credibility of journalists who fail to acknowledge that potential. If it ever occurs everyone better walk into it with a well thought-out plan and eyes wide open, ready to handle the unforseen consequences that would certainly follow...perhaps minor, perhaps enormous.
Then again, large organizations like the NCAA are known for effective rollouts of massive, paradigm-shifting programs. I'm sure it would be fine...
PhoenixHawk
Well-Known Member
Kids want to be paid to play, go to the CFL or start some club team/minor league to get paid. 18 is a grown man, go get a job and work to earn money to pay for your training until the NFL takes you.
