the check is in the mail

The NCAA has long outlived its usefulness, if it were ever useful. The list of malfeasance is nearly endless: recruiting scandals, inability to actually investigate anything, useless bans and suspensions, moneymaking skills on par with FIFA, shit leadership, and general incompetence. I have way too many thoughts on the NCAA to come to some clear conclusion and you blame that on my life long love of sport. I want it to be good and fair but I know it's not.

Paying athletes has long been an issue across major moneymaking sports at major universities. Right of the bat we should bear in mind this first fact - most major university athletic departments don't operate at a profit.(here's a link to a great site with mid-tier University of Iowa chosen). Undoubtedly, the massive programs (Texas, Alabama, Ohio St.) have football programs that pull the entire department over the line but the vast majority of departments lose money. Paying athletes, on top of the losing financial proposition in place, doesn't make financial sense. Football players at the major programs are now essentially 'paid' to study their chose profession - a year of tuition, room and board at USC is allegedly $72K. For a football player when you consider travel, equipment, special training, medical, additional facilities, special diet/food/training meals, etc, you can add something like 40% to that number, so we are talking about $100K per year, $400K over four years to study your chosen profession at a level that even academic scholarship students studying the likes of medicine, science, or English will never see. And, post-graduation, who donates more back to major universities, athletes or other alumni? Maybe the donations come because the football program is doing well. I don't know, but I suspect that non-athletes contribute to the endowment number more than athletes. I could go deeper into other stuff I ponder in this particular area, but I won't.

I won't go further because I'm more on the players' side than the universities and the NCAA. Even though I know that USC was USC before Reggie Bush, and USC will be USC after Reggie Bush, they did benefit from his name and likeness during his time there. Yes, USC made Reggie Bush, not vice versa (anyone think Reggie Bush at North Dakota St. would have had the same career?). It wouldn't be a reach to see schools begin to pay athletes but eliminate athletic scholarships and tell athletes that "we'll pay you $150K per year, but you owe us $100K for your training and facilities." Might not work out as well as one thought.

What else? Well, how about we do away with college athletics as we know it and move all the athletics to the Art Department? (Hat tip to anonymous source on that one.) How about the NCAA tries to get with the game and figure out how to move forward in athlete compensation. How about they work hard on details and methods to ensure that athletes whose names and likenesses earn money are compensated in some way.

How about the professional sports leagues who make billions of dollars fund minor leagues along the lines of MLB and junior hockey in Canada? I'm not sure why we still think that universities and colleges should be in the business of profit and sport on the level we currently see.

I'd like to think that the downfall of the NCAA might foretell the end of college sports but it will more likely bring more money and graft into colleges and universities.

Oh, what started this? What made you read all this junk? It's this article on California deciding to allow college athletes to be paid.