Jay Bilas In The WSJ On How To Fix College Sports (hint: pay is involved)

[ChicosBailBonds]

Every word of this is so true. It is pretty funny to hear an ultra-conservative, free-market Republican like Chicos arguing that these workers -- and that's what the athletes are -- shouldn't be allowed to compete for whatever wages they merited on the open market. That's capitalism defined, for crissakes!

Not a Republican, don't believe in a free market because it doesn't exist...it's t-shirt slogan, not reality.  It's like saying all people are equal...no they aren't...are you 6'10", can you ride a horse to a win at the Kentucky Derby, can you program in Machine language and cook a souffle while juggling a soccer ball 50 times on your head?  

Ironic your overall statement since I am supporting a NCAA position that is anything but capitalistic.  

What else you got?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Exploitation - The action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work.

The NCAA is a wage fixing cartel made up of institutions that have agreed to not pay any players. The whole purpose of the NCAA is to enforce these rules, because without oversight the institutions would obviously break these rules in order to attract the best talent. This talent is clearly more valuable than all those free things you mentioned above, and I believe it is unfair to deny them this value. I believe the institutions do it to keep the money in their control.
 Isn't it common knowledge that large amounts of money are currently being funneled to recruits and players at many big time schools? The value of good players to these institutions is apparent. So while it might not be an African diamond mine, it's still exploitation. The degree of immorality associated with the exploitation does not change that fact.

They aren't treated unfairly.  They are given a $200K education...a person with a college education on average makes almost $1M more than someone without.  So now we're up to $1.2M

Free clothes, free room, free food, free tutoring, free coaching from some of the best coaches in the world, free auditions for their next gig.  What's all of that worth?  In some cases....millions.  Sam Dekker sure has been exploited the last two weeks.

They are treated fairly in so many ways.  It's obscene to say they are exploited when there are people in this world truly exploited.  OBSCENE.  

And in your belief that it is so unfair, how are you going to make it fair?  Does the starting guard make more than the starting forward?  How about the bench player, who all of a sudden hits a winning 3?  Does the guard at Duke get more "fair" treatment than the guard at North Dakota?  How about the ladies?

Life is so unfair for these guys....so terribly, terribly unfair....the exploitation....off the charts....all that money that should be going to THEM, because each year we watch the NCAA tournament specifically to watch THEM!!  No, that's right, we shut down the televisions when these guys graduate because it was really ONLY about them that we watched.  And if not enough big school powerhouses are in, we definitely don't watch.  Syracuse isn't in this year, yet ratings are off the charts....so by and large that means Syracuse players shouldn't get one dime....right?  Afterall, they weren't exploited and it didn't impact the viewership audience one bit. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I am fiscally moderate.

And I have never once said that only the revenue-sports athletes should get a piece of the pie. Cross country and volleyball athletes also are full-time workers.

I do not pretend to know exactly how the money should be divvied up. I just believe what's taking place now doesn't seem equitable.

Based on 100's of posts here, that I find to be one of the more interesting statements ever stated here.  I'd like to know your "moderate" positions on fiscal policies, they seem to have eluded me over the last 5 years.   

[MU82]

Based on 100's of posts here, that I find to be one of the more interesting statements ever stated here.  I'd like to know your "moderate" positions on fiscal policies, they seem to have eluded me over the last 5 years.   

If I shared that, it would be on the Politics board. Better shared in person over a beverage or two, though.

Just not going to get sucked into arguing for the sake of arguing. But nice try.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If I shared that, it would be on the Politics board. Better shared in person over a beverage or two, though.

Just not going to get sucked into arguing for the sake of arguing. But nice try.

Would love to have the beer with you....seriously would.  I think it would be fun.  I don't bite, but I do have a small penis (Sultan) so don't expect much from me there.

I'd like to continue the conversation, but I have a front and backyard to mow and edge before my wife returns from central California with in-laws in tow.

I do, however, hope to take an hour or so off today between finishing my taxes and the yardwork, to watch the women's tournament and the exploitation going on there.

[Boozemon Barro]

They aren't treated unfairly.  They are given a $200K education...a person with a college education on average makes almost $1M more than someone without.  So now we're up to $1.2M

Free clothes, free room, free food, free tutoring, free coaching from some of the best coaches in the world, free auditions for their next gig.  What's all of that worth?  In some cases....millions.  Sam Dekker sure has been exploited the last two weeks.

They are treated fairly in so many ways.  It's obscene to say they are exploited when there are people in this world truly exploited.  OBSCENE.  

And in your belief that it is so unfair, how are you going to make it fair?  Does the starting guard make more than the starting forward?  How about the bench player, who all of a sudden hits a winning 3?  Does the guard at Duke get more "fair" treatment than the guard at North Dakota?  How about the ladies?

Life is so unfair for these guys....so terribly, terribly unfair....the exploitation....off the charts....all that money that should be going to THEM, because each year we watch the NCAA tournament specifically to watch THEM!!  No, that's right, we shut down the televisions when these guys graduate because it was really ONLY about them that we watched.  And if not enough big school powerhouses are in, we definitely don't watch.  Syracuse isn't in this year, yet ratings are off the charts....so by and large that means Syracuse players shouldn't get one dime....right?  Afterall, they weren't exploited and it didn't impact the viewership audience one bit. 

You can keep your head in the sand and pretend that they are fairly compensated, but I'll take the decades of recruiting violations and suspensions for extra benefits as a pretty obvious indicator that they are not anywhere close to being compensated what the free market would determine to be their value.
  Of course they all aren't worth the same. Their value would be determined during the recruiting process and they would take the best offer a school would be willing to pay them. Just because it's a college sport doesn't mean we have to automatically go to some communist system where everyone gets paid the same. It should be like every other professional sport where the most sought after players sign the most valuable contracts. They should also be able to do whatever endorsement deals they want on the side.
On the flip side, the players in sports with no revenue aren't even worth the cost of the paper their scholarship is printed on. Why has society determined that a cross country runner deserves a scholarship for participating in a sport that their school loses money in? If you like the current system because you're a communist then just tell me because that would at least make sense.

[ChicosBailBonds]

On the flip side, the players in sports with no revenue aren't even worth the cost of the paper their scholarship is printed on. Why has society determined that a cross country runner deserves a scholarship for participating in a sport that their school loses money in? If you like the current system because you're a communist then just tell me because that would at least make sense.

But but but MU82 said I'm a Republican and capitalist.  Which is it.  So confusing.


The NCAA and the schools that make up the NCAA have determined there should be equal footing as much as possible. Same goes for the NFL....funds are distributed equally.  They want to level the playing field as much as possible.  What you are proposing would destroy college sports, not just for revenue sports but obviously for non revenue sports.

When it comes to sports, I'm as socialist as it comes.

[Boozemon Barro]

But but but MU82 said I'm a Republican and capitalist.  Which is it.  So confusing.

So your response is to take something someone else said and ask me to defend his reasoning? You're going to have to do better than that Mr. Bail Bonds.

[Boozemon Barro]

But but but MU82 said I'm a Republican and capitalist.  Which is it.  So confusing.


The NCAA and the schools that make up the NCAA have determined there should be equal footing as much as possible. Same goes for the NFL....funds are distributed equally.  They want to level the playing field as much as possible.  What you are proposing would destroy college sports, not just for revenue sports but obviously for non revenue sports.

When it comes to sports, I'm as socialist as it comes.

Since there is no cap on how much money the haves can pour into their facilities, recruiting budgets, or coaching salaries, the current system certainly isn't leveling the  playing field for the have nots very much. I'm also not sold on equal dispursements of money since NCAA units are handed out based on tournament performance and conferences negotiate television contracts on their own. Maybe if the NCAA took full controll of all television contracts and truly dispersed that money equally among all member institutions your dream scenario would be reality.

[ChicosBailBonds]

So your response is to take something someone else said and ask me to defend his reasoning? You're going to have to do better than that Mr. Bail Bonds.

I'm hoping you can provide clarity for all of us.  In one sense I'm identified as a Republican (wrong), capitalist free marketer and yet I've advocated for this socialist POV for the NCAA, the NFL, MLB, etc for years.  Hoping you can clarify for me.

I do have another question for you.  Since there are no minor leagues for football or basketball and these players are being developed at 100% cost from the university, when they make it to the pros should they have to reimburse the school for their development costs?  Or should the universities pay for all that as they do today AND also pay the student athlete?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Since there is no cap on how much money the haves can pour into their facilities, recruiting budgets, or coaching salaries, the current system certainly isn't leveling the  playing field for the have nots very much. I'm also not sold on equal dispursements of money since NCAA units are handed out based on tournament performance and conferences negotiate television contracts on their own. Maybe if the NCAA took full controll of all television contracts and truly dispersed that money equally among all member institutions your dream scenario would be reality.

That's different than paying players.  Yes, you can build the biggest, nicest stadium ever and that cost is paid for by the university and their advocates.  From a recruiting perspective, if I read you correctly, this would not be capped.  Spend what you will, sky's the limit to acquire that player.  The NFL doesn't even have this.  The NBA and MLB now have a luxury tax deterrent to prevent such craziness.

If I also take your thinking to its logical conclusions, why aren't we compensating high school players?  Fans go to the high school football games or basketball games, they are charged $5 to $15.  It is free to go to the soccer games, volleyball, track, women's basketball, etc.  Clearly the money is being earned by the high school players (because of course people aren't going to simply support the school, regardless if the team sucks or not).  Why aren't we giving them a cut?

Maybe we can all agree on one thing.....though I doubt it.  The word EXPLOITED is over the top.  They are compensated today, now whether you believe it is enough is another story, but there are people that are truly exploited and the NCAA men's basketball and or men's football players don't fit that bill.

[Lennys Tap]

If I also take your thinking to its logical conclusions, why aren't we compensating high school players?  Fans go to the high school football games or basketball games, they are charged $5 to $15.  It is free to go to the soccer games, volleyball, track, women's basketball, etc.  Clearly the money is being earned by the high school players (because of course people aren't going to simply support the school, regardless if the team sucks or not).  Why aren't we giving them a cut

Football and basketball at the high school level generally operate at a deficit so there aren't any profits to share with the players. Simpleminded, silly analogy.

[Boozemon Barro]

I'm hoping you can provide clarity for all of us.  In one sense I'm identified as a Republican (wrong), capitalist free marketer and yet I've advocated for this socialist POV for the NCAA, the NFL, MLB, etc for years.  Hoping you can clarify for me.

I do have another question for you.  Since there are no minor leagues for football or basketball and these players are being developed at 100% cost from the university, when they make it to the pros should they have to reimburse the school for their development costs?  Or should the universities pay for all that as they do today AND also pay the student athlete?

They could try to negotiate some kind of rights or transfer fee in the contract with the player that the NFL or NBA team would have to pay, but I doubt any players would agree to it. I think all the revenue generated from the backs of the player would be compensation enough for the university. That's what the university would have to decide when they decide how much to pay for a player in order to maximise their return on investment. Right now that isn't a decision they don't have to make which they absolutely LOVE.

[Boozemon Barro]

That's different than paying players.  Yes, you can build the biggest, nicest stadium ever and that cost is paid for by the university and their advocates.  From a recruiting perspective, if I read you correctly, this would not be capped.  Spend what you will, sky's the limit to acquire that player.  The NFL doesn't even have this.  The NBA and MLB now have a luxury tax deterrent to prevent such craziness.

If I also take your thinking to its logical conclusions, why aren't we compensating high school players?  Fans go to the high school football games or basketball games, they are charged $5 to $15.  It is free to go to the soccer games, volleyball, track, women's basketball, etc.  Clearly the money is being earned by the high school players (because of course people aren't going to simply support the school, regardless if the team sucks or not).  Why aren't we giving them a cut?

Maybe we can all agree on one thing.....though I doubt it.  The word EXPLOITED is over the top.  They are compensated today, now whether you believe it is enough is another story, but there are people that are truly exploited and the NCAA men's basketball and or men's football players don't fit that bill.

Well then your reasoning of not paying players is flawed. You said you like it because you want to see the universities competing on an even playing field. Right now it appears to be like most any industry where all the businesses are competing without restriction in every aspect of the industry with the lone exception of compensation for the labor. In that regard they have all colluded together to keep labor prices low. That is wrong and a clear exploitation of the labor.
   I know you desperately want the definition of exploitation to be amended to include some type of human atrocity, but you'll need to take that up with the dictionary companies. There's two cases in the courts right now dealing with the type of exploitation we've been discussing in this thread. I'm pretty confident the courts will decide what the NCAA is doing is exploitative.
  If the high school football industry starts pulling in millions or billions of revenue dollars, then it will probably become necessary to see if the players deserve a slice of that pie. Until then, Mr. Bail Bonds, let's not worry about it.