This season my alma mater has a RB/QB tandem whose combined starpower are going to rake in tens of millions for the athletic department.
In exchange, these young adults receive a scholarship valued at what, $50k?
Those are the facts, not debatable. That is the current model. So the quandry is, how does a principled conservative thinker view this situation?
Is conservatism opposition to change? Should the NFL/NCAA collusion model survive the next few decades?
Or does conservatism value free enterprise and compensate these young men a fair market value for their services?
Which is it?
If the NCAA chose to compensate these kids it should be a cap of say $20k per year for starters and $10k for backups. I think it would be foolish to pay these kids anything that would amount to a large sum of money. All teammates should be paid equally if at all.
True, as is the reality that the venue to showcase these skills can translate into tens of millions for these star athletes, of which the university may receive nothing, absent any form of donation to the scholarship fund.
"In exchange, these young adults receive a scholarship valued at what, $50k?"
See above; the median Division 1 College football scholarship is actually $36K per year so a full 4-year commitment would be worth $144K. Where is the concern for the non-scholarship pre-med major who may unlock new treatment modalities that can extend not only life, but quality of life? You do realize those who fall into this camp often arrive at day 1 of their career with, on average, $180K or more of student loan debt? As some of these individuals practice medicine at schools with an affiliated hospital there is certainly huge upside financially for those schools.
"Those are the facts, not debatable."
Actually, what you posted wasn't all of the facts, just a section removed to create the appearance of a disproportionate benefits system. So, in that vein those facts were most certainly debatable.
"That is the current model. So the quandry is, how does a principled conservative thinker view this situation?"
Interesting phrasing which leads me to question your ideological bent and whether or not that precludes a full appreciation of a free-market, capitalistic society. I'm sorry to say it also smacks of a "gotcha" scenario but I'm willing to allow for some clarification on your part.
"Is conservatism opposition to change? Should the NFL/NCAA collusion model survive the next few decades?"
Again, an interesting choice of phrasing, reeking of more of the "gotcha" mentality of questioning. It would be equally true if the word "liberalism" were inserted; it presupposes an outcome that implies a prejudiced viewpoint at the onset.
"Or does conservatism value free enterprise and compensate these young men a fair market value for their services?"
You have a disconnect in that sentence; the first half is unquestionably true but you assume in the latter that fair market compensation is absent; as outlined above a case can be made that is simply not true.
"Which is it?"
Which are you?
People who want to directly send money to a school or indirectly send it there via merchandise purchase or viewership create the perceived issue. If the players think they are being slighted, that is their right, but the schools are not obligated to do anything about it. I think Mike eluded to this above, but the schools also provide a platform for students to succeed in the future, both in athletics and beyond. I don't like the part money plays in the NCAA realm, and I wish motives were as pure as they may have been once, but it isn't going to revert back and it's also not for me to decide.
A university may or may not get a big return from an academic full ride student. My guess is those students sometimes become heavy donors in the future, but I'm sure it doesn't always happen. I'm not sure the claims that schools get no return from said students can be substantiated, but if anyone has some numbers to put up feel free.
And in law school, I got an academic scholarship, $2k/year. The other $70k I paid for. I was 1/3 of the scholarships given to white males that year.
Tell me again how the math kids have it so good compared to the athletes.
I think these power 5 universities can make a case that their blue chippers should pay them. Their face and name is plastered all over national tv, social media and every other outlet.
It is an extremely flawed system but it at least resembles amature sports now.
The thing also..... if you think it's a mess right now with schools and alumni slipping money and gifts under the table.... wait until they are paid, finding ways to do more..... and the biggest schools buying the best of the players. As it is now the mid sized and small schools are disadvantaged enough when it comes to attracting talent. Having to pay players puts yet more stress on the limited budget these schools have to deal with. The "Haves" will become more powerful.... the "Have nots" will slip down even farther.
The football programs in some major schools bring in obscene amounts of money, that's true (Mid majors not so much).... but in most schools the football programs fund the entire athletic programs (and scholarships) for all the other sports that operate at a great loss. And lets not forget the federally mandated woman's programs Title X or what ever they call it. For every male athletic scholarship there must be a female scholarship. I know some fairly mundane young lady golfers whose parents were on the ball and got their girls onto a golf team with a full ride.....
You would have to pay all players a salary range and not just those at good schools. The numbers wouldn't work and it would also become very similar to the NFL.
Also, instead of being students they would be viewed like NFL players which would change the CFB game. A union definitely would be formed - imagine CFB players going on strike?
You would also have to create a fair system for all teams as the current system isn't.
You would see ticket prices double and triple and students would lose their "free" seats.
CFB has it's issues but paying them would make it worse.
