The Bobcat Nation

Saw this today. If you play for a college team that profits more than $5 million/year, you get to go to grad school for free.

TomCat88 wrote:Saw this today. If you play for a college team that profits more than $5 million/year, you get to go to grad school for free.

Sounds reasonable. Although I do prefer the stipend approach. I hate the idea that a son/daughter of wealthy parents is free to spend as much money as they want during college, but if a guy is a college athlete that is making the college millions of dollars, it's some kind of crime for them to get a little spending money (from people who are more than happy to give it to them, but just don't happen to be his/her parents) to enjoy life even a little bit if they come from a poor family.

Reimbursement by merit makes sense, hopefully unionization will help and not hinder this idea.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... d-unionize

Bay Area Cat wrote:

TomCat88 wrote:Saw this today. If you play for a college team that profits more than $5 million/year, you get to go to grad school for free.

Sounds reasonable. Although I do prefer the stipend approach. I hate the idea that a son/daughter of wealthy parents is free to spend as much money as they want during college, but if a guy is a college athlete that is making the college millions of dollars, it's some kind of crime for them to get a little spending money (from people who are more than happy to give it to them, but just don't happen to be his/her parents) to enjoy life even a little bit if they come from a poor family.

It's called life isn't fair; never has been, never will be. DEAL WITH IT.

grizzh8r wrote:

Bay Area Cat wrote:

TomCat88 wrote:Saw this today. If you play for a college team that profits more than $5 million/year, you get to go to grad school for free.

Sounds reasonable. Although I do prefer the stipend approach. I hate the idea that a son/daughter of wealthy parents is free to spend as much money as they want during college, but if a guy is a college athlete that is making the college millions of dollars, it's some kind of crime for them to get a little spending money (from people who are more than happy to give it to them, but just don't happen to be his/her parents) to enjoy life even a little bit if they come from a poor family.

It's called life isn't fair; never has been, never will be. DEAL WITH IT.

Why should anyone (outside of the USSR) be forced to "deal with it?" We live in a free country and a (supposedly) capitalistic society. Shouldn't everyone (even athletes) be allowed the freedom to make money from their talents?

And it's true -- life often isn't fair. But a lot of people do believe that in America that people should all have the same opportunities to succeed. In this instance, the NCAA is proactively restricting freedoms and proactively arresting the free market system in order to advance their quite socialistic approach.

But like they say, "Life isn't fair, Comrade. Mother NCAA says you have what we say you have and nothing more. Being paid based on your value is against the teachings of the Communist Party and is an insult to the People's Republic of the NCAA. Deal with it, Comrade, and you won't be disappeared."

Bay Area Cat wrote:

grizzh8r wrote:

Bay Area Cat wrote:

TomCat88 wrote:Saw this today. If you play for a college team that profits more than $5 million/year, you get to go to grad school for free.

Sounds reasonable. Although I do prefer the stipend approach. I hate the idea that a son/daughter of wealthy parents is free to spend as much money as they want during college, but if a guy is a college athlete that is making the college millions of dollars, it's some kind of crime for them to get a little spending money (from people who are more than happy to give it to them, but just don't happen to be his/her parents) to enjoy life even a little bit if they come from a poor family.

It's called life isn't fair; never has been, never will be. DEAL WITH IT.

Why should anyone (outside of the USSR) be forced to "deal with it?" We live in a free country and a (supposedly) capitalistic society. Shouldn't everyone (even athletes) be allowed the freedom to make money from their talents?

And it's true -- life often isn't fair. But a lot of people do believe that in America that people should all have the same opportunities to succeed. In this instance, the NCAA is proactively restricting freedoms and proactively arresting the free market system in order to advance their quite socialistic approach.

But like they say, "Life isn't fair, Comrade. Mother NCAA says you have what we say you have and nothing more. Being paid based on your value is against the teachings of the Communist Party and is an insult to the People's Republic of the NCAA. Deal with it, Comrade, and you won't be disappeared."

Ok is simplifying it to say it a socialist approach. In socialism all would get the scholarships, equally divided. What we have now is a hybrid system with differing values. I would say that a degree from Duke pays offf better than one from MSU also.

Whatever you want to say it is, it's the opposite of a capitalistic system. It's a strong central authority restricting the ability of people to freely enter into mutually beneficial financial arrangements out of an ideology that such free market transactions run counter to the best interest of the collective.