Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk
With all the $$ the schools make off these kids, they should at least receive some sort of stipend. With school and ball they don't have much time left over for a job, so that's why you end up with agents giving them money, cars, meals, etc.
|
That's very debatable. Most economists that have researched Div. 1 college athletics conclude that most schools don't make a profit off football & basketball. The consistently successful schools do, but for every one of them there are 10-20 schools that invested millions in capital improvements such as stadiums & they're still waiting to get out of the red.
In addition, revenue generating sports pay for non-revenue sports & title 9 requires schools to fund women's sports equitably, most if not all of which don't generate revenue.
The system is defnitely flawed, but paying the kids, even a small stipend, would really be an ethical challenge & regulatory nightmare IMO. How would such a stipend be regulated? One of the problems w/college athletics is each school tries to keep up w/the jones.' It's not enough to have a huge state of the art stadium, big programs have indoor practice facilities, new gyms & a/v equipment, etc. I can imagine how some schools would find a way to circumvent ncaa rules to pay players more than what their stipend allowed.