In wake of the USC scandal in which former star, Reggie Bush and his family, were provided "illegal" cash, gifts, and home, it got me thinking about sports and the free market. Of course these type of "scandals" in big-time collegiate sports, such as basketball and football, are nothing new. They've been happening for decades. Under the table payments and gifts to "amateur" athletes is akin to dealing drugs. Most do not get caught, but those that do face severe punishments. I shouldn't exactly say that college players are slaves. After all it's voluntary and they do get a "free" scholarship in return. Whether the athletes get a real education, however, is debatable. The real issue is NOT to pay amateur athletes, despite the fact that they are largely responsible for bringing in billion$ in TV contracts and ticket sale revenues. In fact they may be the only ones in the food chain not being paid. Athletes at big-time programs often find no time to work part time jobs because of the sheer amounts of time put into practice and competition. In fact sports IS their job and a full-time one at that. Even Andrew Zimbalist, a college professor with a leftest slant, proposed that college sports teams should be professionalized. That would help put an end to "corruption" and help divert wasteful resources away from evading the system to actually providing a positive environment for student-atheletes and their schools. While paying the players may seem like a simple solution, implementation is a different story. Though some have proposed a college/minor league system, the NCAA has a vested interest in falsely promoting the myth of amateurism and monopolizing the revenues for themselves and the schools.
The economic model of college sports is a strange one. Rules are enforced by the NCAA. Schools in violation will not face fines or arrest, but instead face curtailment of athletic scholarships, TV ban, postseason ban, etc. My question is this. Is the NCAA a legal monopoly?
If not directly then definately by extension, through the university monopoly.
Peace
Sports --> TV --> Gummint Cartel
SOOOO many problems here. Title IX is such a big one. Pretty much, schools use all the money they get from football and basketball and use them to fund all the crappy girls sports that nobody gives a shit about.
I think that all schools that take any government money should not be allowed to offer athletic scholarships. The college system is an idiot way to train people for professional sports. And if your not trying to become a professional, then why the fuck should you get a scholarship for playing? Sports teams should be on the same level as the frisbee club.
No, to my knowledge it is not a monopoly. Like the BCS, participation the NCAA is voluntary (correct me if I'm wrong). The history of the NCAA is a little shady-- I know Teddy Roosevelte was pissed after his nephew or son or some crap got hurt playing football and then made a push to establish a regulatory body.
Besides, with the major conference shake up that's under way, we could soon have 4 "super conferences" that tell the NCAA to to take a hike. They could then form a new regulatory body and new set of rules.
Concerning the "We should pay college players" argument, I fully disagree.
1) You attend to college for an education, not athletics. If you want to play professional sports, there are leagues all over the place.
2) If you need money to pay for anything college-related, you can get what is called a student loan. Pay rent, utilities, meals, etc.
I majored in engineering and had no time for a part time job. According to your thoughts, I should get paid because I don't have the time for a part time job. However, no one on this board or in any other arena of sportstalk would think that engineering students should get paid because they have a time-consuming major. Hell, every major is time consuming if the student takes his/her studies seriously.
Bottom line: if students want to get paid, they enter the draft of a professional league, not to college.
"Bottom line: if students want to get paid, they enter the draft of a professional league, not to college."
but the leagues put age limits on when you can enter the drafts. This protects the owners from having to invest money into player development, and it helps the players union because it protects the players already in the league from competition for an extra year or two.
Team sports is an odd place, because there is almost no competition. The different sports compete somewhat amongst each other for the dollars of the general sports fan, but you aren't going to see much competition within a sport. Most cities have only one team in America, and the leagues limit the number of teams. The network effect is sooo strong for the big leagues, nowadays, it seems like it would be impossible to compete against them in the same sport. Not to mention the fact that because they limit the # of teams, they can hold cities hostage to use taxpayer money to build stadiums that cost hundreds of millions of dollars or else risk the team relocating to a city that will build the stadium.
GetReal,
What I'm saying is that these athletes are making money for the TV networks and schools. We're talking billions. Something seems amiss when coaches have to sneak in gifts, cars, and money in order to get an athlete to commit. They should be allowed just to pay them without fear of punishment. Also things are amiss when players have college majors chosen for them and are forced to take certain classes by professors who'll pass them no matter what. Things have gotten better however, but they still have a long ways to go.
I think something that could put at end to it would be to set up a transitional league. With an 18-23 age restriction, and with the goal of developing the top high school talent in the country into NFL talents. Pay them, sign them all to contracts that make the league act as the players agent on the players rookie NFL contract. Use that money, and any money made from tv and ticket sales to guarantee (at least) 4 years of education for anyone that makes one of the teams (since playing in the league would automatically ban you from ever playing a college sport).
Hire only former NFL coaches and scouts. Only have 4 or 6 teams( New York City, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and Washington D.C. are all MAJOR markets with a relatively minimal cultural history of following college football) coach "NFL style" techniques (i.e. no gimmicky spread offenses, no side arm delivery)
You would be working against a HUGE amount cultural tradition, but in many ways it would be a risk free decision for top high school athletes, and many teenagers are going to have a tough time turning down tens of thousands of dollars.
Another big marketing question would be how much of the attention that college football gets has to do with the schools and the history, tradition, pagentry, etc. and how much is it about getting the chance to 'watch the stars of tomorrow, today' This sort of pre-professional league would be ale to target that audience much better than the NCAA, because its talent would not be nearly as spread out, and it would be coached with an NFL future in mind (something which could take away the excitement factor in games, since the goal is not simply to win)