-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
article says college football is a con game, of sorts
- Thread starter argh!
- Start date
CatGrad-UMGradStu
Well-known member
argh! said:
I appreciate that you chose to post this article as I enjoy Brewer as much as I dislike everything Bradley with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution twists and turns facts and data. As much as I love going to SEC games, this year just doesn't seem plausible to me. I'll probably just go fishing on Saturday afternoons this fall. Or perhaps shoot another buck and bull for some reason. Hunting to me is no longer sport and I suppose many of my football crazed friends and family will step back after this fall and assess their thoughts on the game. Especially those who played beyond high school and college.
Who's the author and what does he know about sports? I found the article to be a bit odd and off base. I think big time sports, both college and professional, are a bit out of whack, and the NCAA seems consistently out to lunch, but I didn't really agree with what this writer was saying.
PlayerRep said:
just put it there for information. glad some have read it, i don't really care about 'big time' college football but thought it might stir some conversation. some of those afraid of different viewpoints will dismiss it without reading at all, but what can you do... they complain about political posts, then add some snide political statement to half of what they write here. just the way it is.
IdaGriz01
Well-known member
The author seems mostly focused on the monster money-makers among college programs, which certainly deserve a hard look. But, as we all know, most programs do not actually show a profit, even when you exclude their accounting tricks.
But aside from that, let’s look at the players situation. This can be tricky too. Here’s some context. According to numbers out of the NCAA and NAIA, colleges can have about 25,000 scholarships “in play” at any given time. About a quarter to one-fifth of all those recipients go off their schollie (graduate or leave for other reasons) each year … say about 5,400. Let’s project that about 400 land in the NFL, CFL, or some other decently-paying pro level. That’s about 5,000 football players who got a “free” [NOT!] education so they can go out looking for a “real” job. We know it’s not free, but how “non-free” was it?
I almost gave up at this point, because I had no idea where I might get some data. Luckily, someone had already tackled the problem. The link is: https://collegead.com/how-much-debt-are-student-athletes-leaving-with/
The article is not that long, but here’s the key conclusion:
But before we gasp too much at what the major-sport athletes owe, let’s add a wee bit of context. In 2016, when the article came out, the average student debt was just short of $30,000. Those 5,000 scholarship players certainly did not get a “free” education … but they were about $18,000 better off than the roughly 2 million students who earned bachelor's degrees without that advantage.
The other issues have been chewed over on here many times in the past. The main reality is that, at many -- most? -- schools, the pittances that go to athletes in other sports come from football and/or basketball revenue. If the major-sports scholarships are pumped up to cover full “cost of attendance,” at least two negative consequences will follow. First, ticket prices will almost certainly go up … and many fans already think they’re too high. Second, athletes in non-revenue sports will either get less from their scholarships, or (more likely) their sports will be eliminated.
But aside from that, let’s look at the players situation. This can be tricky too. Here’s some context. According to numbers out of the NCAA and NAIA, colleges can have about 25,000 scholarships “in play” at any given time. About a quarter to one-fifth of all those recipients go off their schollie (graduate or leave for other reasons) each year … say about 5,400. Let’s project that about 400 land in the NFL, CFL, or some other decently-paying pro level. That’s about 5,000 football players who got a “free” [NOT!] education so they can go out looking for a “real” job. We know it’s not free, but how “non-free” was it?
I almost gave up at this point, because I had no idea where I might get some data. Luckily, someone had already tackled the problem. The link is: https://collegead.com/how-much-debt-are-student-athletes-leaving-with/
The article is not that long, but here’s the key conclusion:
The author makes the point that the figure goes way in the crapper for the non-revenue sports.
But before we gasp too much at what the major-sport athletes owe, let’s add a wee bit of context. In 2016, when the article came out, the average student debt was just short of $30,000. Those 5,000 scholarship players certainly did not get a “free” education … but they were about $18,000 better off than the roughly 2 million students who earned bachelor's degrees without that advantage.
The other issues have been chewed over on here many times in the past. The main reality is that, at many -- most? -- schools, the pittances that go to athletes in other sports come from football and/or basketball revenue. If the major-sports scholarships are pumped up to cover full “cost of attendance,” at least two negative consequences will follow. First, ticket prices will almost certainly go up … and many fans already think they’re too high. Second, athletes in non-revenue sports will either get less from their scholarships, or (more likely) their sports will be eliminated.
