I dont know what to think at this point. I was always of the belief that a college scholarship was quite the privilege given to those athletes (and scholars) that earned one. I was a bit appalled that students would ask for more. Especially with rise of cost of an education over the past 30 years or so those scholarships represent quite a bit of money. Four years of college is no small amount of money. This was in addition to the platform that college athletics gave these athletes to display their skill/talent to the next level. That also is a massive benefit that if not provided those athletes with next level talent would not be seen. I think the value of both of those benefits is underestimated because it is weighed against what the Universities/Colleges are gaining by marketing and selling the product that is college athletics which I know is massive for many schools. Most of those schools though have “earned it” by providing an elite platform through being successful programs that bring alot of attention and therefore marketing/money making power. The Alabama, Ohio States and many other big time schools are largely plug and play. I don’t buy that the quarterback who won the heisman this year changed things for Alabama financially. Alabama changed things financially for him. The point is these kids marketing value is they are the quarterback for Alabama, it doesn’t matter specifically who that quarterback is. The same goes for PAC-12 schools etc. they all have large fan bases who pay a lot of money for tickets, gear etc. They do that regardless of the name on the jerseys. So to me the real value has not been earned by individual players that are cashing in on their name and likeness. They are cashing in on being the quarterback of Oregon, Ohio State etc.
I can understand the “real cost of attendance” scholarships if being an athlete prevents athletes from being able to get a job and make extra money for leisure activities or other necessities that weren’t provided for by their scholarship.
I guess maybe we should just develop a league for athletes out of high school to develop and be seen where they can get paid and not have to go to college. I think with the ridiculous cost of a college education and the decline in its necessity/value there should be alot less people going to college. Why accrue that debt when it has become a real life altering problem to pay it off once entering the workforce? People are finding so many ways to make money now that don’t require a college education and I think more and more students who are choosing a college are doing so online. I am not sure the current college model will survive anyway. I apologize for the tangent/digression. Just some thoughts. Would like to hear others thoughts maybe someone can change my mind about how the NIL and portal are good things that won’t lead to the disintegration of the athletic landscape of all but the P5, G5 and a select number of other institutions who can offer more financial benefits than others.
On a smaller note do you all think the “real cost of attendance” scholarships have caused an imbalance at the FCS level. I don’t think the Montana schools offer these.