March 17, 2005
NCAA makes preemptive strike on paying players
ESPN's new college channel, ESPNU, hosted a discussion on paying college athletes this week. From the talking points, the NCAA is already laying the hammer to the idea. While outsiders estimate that many schools are achieving a 30-40% profit on college athletics, NCAA President Myles Brand poo-poo'd that notion:
"A dozen of our over 1,000 schools make a profit," he said. "Most schools subsidize their athletic departments."
Excuse me? "A dozen" schools are making money?! You gotta be kidding me. Brand is working the media on the schools' behalf, to foster the notion that there's just not enough money going around to doll out to athletes. I simply don't buy this excuse - at least at the major college level.
I don't agree with paying college athletes. If the scholarship, experience, & exposure isn't enough for you - take your game to the pros or semi-pros. But I don't believe the NCAA for a second saying that schools aren't making a profit in athletics.
Comments:
Jeff said:
posted on March 17, 2005 12:45 PM — 24.197.126.228 — link — abuse?
Things got pretty testy between Brand and John Thompson during that Town Hall from what I've read. I think Thompson was playing devil's advocate just to needle Brand since Thompson and Bobby Knight are friendly. Their exchange was about a coach's responsibility for academics.
Terence said:
posted on March 17, 2005 3:25 PM — 209.213.198.25 — link — abuse?
I'm not at all surprised that the atheletic departments don't make money. Football might bring in a lot of money, but as Jon points out, there are many other sports. And you often hear that even football teams lose money going to bowl games.
Damien said:
posted on March 17, 2005 11:02 PM — 66.169.103.60 — link — abuse?
One key aspect of paying players always goes over looked, taxes. If the schools pays them, then Uncle Sam will want FICA and other payroll taxes. Nobody has talked about those implications; you just cannot pay football and basketball.
Robert said:
posted on March 18, 2005 11:15 AM — 161.247.135.55 — link — abuse?
Most schools have over 400 student athletes within all the different sports. So if they are paid only $5 per hour for 20 hours the total would be over $2 million on a yearly basis. Most schools would have a hard time coming up with an additional 2m per year so you know the lesser sports would be cut in a heartbeat. These athletes should just be grateful that they are getting a free education and quit complaining about not being paid. I guess free tuition is not payment enough.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
Jon Johnston said:
posted on March 17, 2005 12:29 PM — 64.65.170.35 — link — abuse?If you don't believe him, you can check on it. Budgets are publicly available for public universities.
I'm a Nebraska alum - I know that we're one of the few schools that typically make a profit.
When you consider that we have 22 sports, most of them non-revenue, I don't understand how anyone could think that a school with a large athletic department could make a profit.