Post Reply to Rock's House

This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

Message:

HTTP Link (optional):

Poster's Email (optional):

 


Post being replied to

My point is we are talking about different worlds. The by Irishdog80

blue bloods of college football and to a lesser degree, basketball, hockey, wrestling at Iowa, etc all make a lot of money that makes the whole concept of paying the athletes a valid discussion. If you break it down to the idea of "pay college athletes", it becomes a lot more complicated. Paying college athletes across all sports other than a full tuition plus room and board, is not viable for the lion's share of college sports...893 schools play college football, around 5300 total schools play some form of sports.

If the idea of 40-50% of revenue was applied, the college football world would be cleaved into 50-75 programs that can pay...to varying degrees...and everybody else. The idea of Notre Dame's "4 year degree" would be tossed out the window...and every player would be a free agent every year with teams bidding on the talent available within the "salary limits" each school has. In short, a minor league for pro football.