No, the athletes do NOT deserve compensation. There are other comments in this thread that also say they deserve to be paid. But no, they do NOT.
Ok.
The natural progression would be for athletes to be compensated by the recipients of those billions they are creating with their performances -- the universities who receive TV and other revenues.
You ever buy a pair of Nike shoes or an Iphone?
The truth is the NCAA was forced to make the change because the courts tend to agree with....well the law?
We might as well not even have games then. If they can't have their own rules.
? Not sure the correlation with your comment and mine
College basketball is a game. For student-athletes. That should have its own rules.
Slippery slope comment is weak because it argues about policy not the fact the athletes should be paid. They are two separate issues.
Colleges bidding on students yearly is already way more than a slippery slope...it's a gigantic mountaintop cliff dropoff.
This is my biggest issue with the NIL thing. The NCAA and the universities are making billions, but we need to donate our money to DTA to try to lure recruits in hopes that we can field a good team and make the university more money! It's so backwards.
Your opening sentence is funny. I think its absolutely viewed as compensation but that part is equal across almost all schools. Its not like the Gophers are offering free college and Indiana isnt. Or UNI, or SDSU or any number of schools. So take that away and what compensation remains? Thats the difference.
The tv contracts the SEC and Big Ten have negotiated for football and basketball say otherwise. Schools found a way to pay for the plethora of athletic programs they cannot afford. Can't have your cake and eat it to.
We watch because of the schools. Not because of the players. If they were on any other team, nobody would watch.
I went to a gathering where Coyle and Ben spoke ( a year ago)and addressed NIL. You have exactly captured the equity mentality they expressed in that meeting. You are spot on here. Have they modified their opinion of how to deal with NIL since then? I would hope so, but the U is always a step behind the music in my view and it may well be too little too late.
My opening line was more in reference to people saying the players deserve to be compensated. They already are compensated in the form of a free college education. Can certainly be argued that with all the money in college sports that a free education isn't enough. But for a long time it was seen as a fair tradeoff.
on New Balance.
I agree; however, the money that the students deserve, should come from the money that they generate.
The players aren't generating the money. If they didn't have the school logo on, they wouldn't generate a nickel.
ASICS give me the width I need. In the length department I’m impressive as is.
A good test case of this is the G-league. In theory, some of the best college players which should make for an entertaining product. The Iowa Wolves averaged 4,148/game last year (2022-2023), which was a franchise record (and they were 2nd in the G-league).
And zero TV dollars or interest.
If your a NBA coach who's vetting prospects and you happen to like cam as a prospect... Would you as an organization want him developing under your coaches or have him learning under CBJ.....
Luka Garza…. Of course the Iowa Wolves are going to draw well
