Scholarship table
"Without limits" is when this situation gets out of control.
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.
The fact that the NCAA might need a "salary cap" speaks volumes about the unfairness of the current situation.
What is unfair about the current situation? That they get a free education, free room and board, free tutoring, free world class coaching, free access to network of powerful alumni that 99.9% of other students don't get.The idea like most of Bayless ideas, is laughable.
It gets clicks. I'd be shocked if Bayless himself believes 50% of what he says.
If someone was ready to basically pay you $10M when you were 18 years old, or you could go to school for 4 years and risk potential injury that would eliminate that $10M talent/skill - would 4 years of a free education, room and board, tutoring be enough to compel you to forgo that immediate payout? And like many of the top football recruits, assume you came from a family with limited economic resources - what would you do Chicos?
But how many 18-year olds are physically ready to jump to, and play in, the NFL? I would say very, very few. So either you would need some type of development league (low pay, risk of injury) or they go to college...and they don't need to stay for four years, I believe they only need to play two years if they redshirt.This is the issue I have with paying college players - yes, a few sell a lot of jerseys and draw extra fans, but what about the third string right tackle or the backup punter? Do you pay them the same amount? We're talking about setting up a system more focused on the "superstars" of which there are very few. The majority of college football players don't play in the NFL, so a four or five year full scholarship with the attendant benefits seems more than fair.
Berg, there is money everywhere and it would hardly just be the ivies. There are only so many roster positions. You would also have many Ivy alumni that would be furious that certain kids are being rolled at their institutions that have no academic ability to succeed there.The beneficiaries would be large schools with large alumni bases that already place sports at a high level with academics somewhere in the middle.
Furthermore, I don't know if it is college football's responsibility to pay players because the 18 year old's access to the free market is blocked by a labor agreement.
I agree that the NFL's labor agreement doesn't create college football's responsibility to pay collegiate football players. It is college football's responsibility to pay players because those schools use those players to generate a god awful amount of income for their athletic departments.
I don't disagree. I am not sure that you can just open it up completely. Even the NFL and NBA have salary caps.
That's the beauty of Bayless' argument. He's not advocating that schools squeeze their athletic departments budgets to pay the players
You would also have many Ivy alumni that would be furious that certain kids are being rolled at their institutions that have no academic ability to succeed there.
Some of the Ivies - Harvard specifically - gave up "academic ability to succeed" a long time ago when they sold out to the socialist wing of the Democratic party to become it's training ground. They have become a degree mill for those who buy into the philosophy.
Give me a break. The kid that just decommitted from SMU signed a 1 year deal in China for $1.2M. He'll get endorsements, too. Buy-bye. The NCAA shouldnt cater to a very select group of kids that DONT HAVE to play college basketball but willingly CHOOSE to. If the NBA wants an age limit, there is nothing prohibiting kids from playing abroad or in the D-League. Take a hike. See ya later. The NCAA shouldnt bend over backwards for a select group of kids that are using college basketball for a year or two to make an NBA roster. College basketball will do just fine if the top 20 or so kids every year decide to play for pay somewhere. To my knowledge, no one is putting a gun to each kid's head and telling him he has to play college basketball. Oh, not mature enough to play abroad? Well, apparently those same kids are mature enough 9 months later to interview agents, hire an agent, sign endorsement deals, sign a multi-million dollar contract, and present himself in a way that is endearing to a NBA franchise's fans. Get lost.College football players have less options. Is that the fault of the NCAA? Nope. Dont like the rules? Take a hike. Again, there is no gun to the head of these high school players to sign with a college. So what is their alternative to college? I dont know. Maybe some of them should email the NFL commissioner and ask what their options are.... And I cant believe someone is arguing that they are risking injury. Again, no one is making them play the sport. There is risk/reward with every decision in life. If football players had an alternative to college, they would still risk injury in some other developmental league. And I HIGHLY doubt there is room on a 53 man roster for a kid right out of high school. No chance.
Can we also get rid of minimum wage, union rules, OHSA and EEOC rules while we are at it?
What's unfair about it, particularly football, is that the top recruits are blue chip commodities that schools fight over - and profit handsomely from - in building powerful and profitable football teams. These kids bang the hell out of their bodies, are one injury away from never being able to cash in on the near world class talent they've worked hard to develop by the age of 18 - and aren't able to cash in for 3 years. There is no other scenario/"profession" I can think of where a person develops an elite talent/skill, and is not able to cash in on it for 3 years, when the market would otherwise be ready to pay big money for that talent - other than college football model.If someone was ready to basically pay you $10M when you were 18 years old, or you could go to school for 4 years and risk potential injury that would eliminate that $10M talent/skill - would 4 years of a free education, room and board, tutoring be enough to compel you to forgo that immediate payout? And like many of the top football recruits, assume you came from a family with limited economic resources - what would you do Chicos?