Gato78
03-06-2014, 02:14 PM
So I am having lunch today with a guy that knows sports and education. We start discussing the whole pay for play thing and how that could be corrupting and really hurt a school like MU. So as we were talking, I came up with this concept (all rights reserved):
Players in revenue making sports get paid but only for the course credits they receive and they receive a "bonus" for completion of year 2 on graduation track and for graduating. This has a bunch of positives, the first being that it is truly student-athlete based. It means that schools who fake it like Kentucky, can keep faking it but their guys have to be one and dones or they will lose out. Gets players to finish their degrees especially when many (especially football) blow off their second semester senior year to get ready for the draft. It would encourage guys like Vander who are marginal draft choices to stay in school to get the graduation bonus. It would "pay" players based on their academic achievement but it doesn't abuse the kids like now where there is so much money involved but the athletes don't see the rewards (though I think all of America undervalues the education the players receive). It basically encourages kids to stay in school and it evens the playing field. If schools can outright pay, the potential for abuse is huge. There would still be potential for abuse with BS classes etc but North Carolina is having a little trouble right now with the concept of BS classes.
To me, the main thing with this idea is that it puts athletes closer to the student side of the student-athlete equation while fairly distributing some of the TV money. College sports would stop trending toward being nothing more than minor leagues for professional sports. Now someone may have written this before but I don't recall ever seeing this concept discussed. Thoughts?
All rights reserved.
Players in revenue making sports get paid but only for the course credits they receive and they receive a "bonus" for completion of year 2 on graduation track and for graduating. This has a bunch of positives, the first being that it is truly student-athlete based. It means that schools who fake it like Kentucky, can keep faking it but their guys have to be one and dones or they will lose out. Gets players to finish their degrees especially when many (especially football) blow off their second semester senior year to get ready for the draft. It would encourage guys like Vander who are marginal draft choices to stay in school to get the graduation bonus. It would "pay" players based on their academic achievement but it doesn't abuse the kids like now where there is so much money involved but the athletes don't see the rewards (though I think all of America undervalues the education the players receive). It basically encourages kids to stay in school and it evens the playing field. If schools can outright pay, the potential for abuse is huge. There would still be potential for abuse with BS classes etc but North Carolina is having a little trouble right now with the concept of BS classes.
To me, the main thing with this idea is that it puts athletes closer to the student side of the student-athlete equation while fairly distributing some of the TV money. College sports would stop trending toward being nothing more than minor leagues for professional sports. Now someone may have written this before but I don't recall ever seeing this concept discussed. Thoughts?
All rights reserved.