professional vs. amateur swimming.

This is a bit off of the swimming topic, but I profoundly disagree that a college scholarship has no monetary value and that poor, poor pitiful football and basketball players are so exploited by the wicked NCAA and their member coconspirators, er... institutions. This is nonsense from any one of a number of angles. You think college scholarship has no monetary value; talk to all the parents that save, scheme and obsess about how they will send their children to college. You argue that top flight athletes don't get an education. That may be true at some universities in some sports, but that is not the case in every school. Who picked the sports factory program where they got no education? Last time I checked, the NCAA has no draft. If an athlete decided to go to Whatsamatta U and failed to graduate because the team encouraged him to take blow-off classes, that was his choice. He and his family had options. Now let's take the big time programs that rake in the big bucks and even with lavish spending, it can still subsidize the other sports in the athletic department. (I am unaware of ANY university where the money programs make so much that it covers the AD, and refunds the excess to the University's general fund.) There is an underlying assumptions that fans pay big money because they want to see the current members of the team. That seems seductive, but let's be honest. As Jerry Seinfeld pointed out, we're not cheering for players, we're cheering for laundry. If a high school star decides to attend our hated rival, we'll hate his guts for next four years. Except for a few marquee players, we couldn't care less who carries the ball for dear old University, as long as he is better than the guy from evil empire University. And let's examine the marquee players, shall we? We love them because earlier in their college careers, when they were all freshman nerves and the whisper of a promise, they made big plays for dear old University, and we expect/hope they will do more of the same. We cheer for these guys because they are all wrapped up in our gauzy recollections of when we were students and all our fond memories of dear old University, and it makes us feel more important and like "winners" when these guys win championships and we can associate ourselves with them. Still don't believe me? Let me take the case from a minor money sport, womens basketball. Columbus OH used to have a womens professional team. Because it was a pro league, and there are generally fewer spots on all pro league rosters than there are spots on Div I basketball programs, I'm betting the Columbus pro team was substantially better than the Lady Buckeyes. Guess who drew higher average attendance, like three times higher. The Lady Buckeyes. It's NOT the individual players; it's the University. Chris Weber (in a rare moment of wisdom) was asked his rookie NBA year whether Michigan needed him to win an NCAA championship. His response was beautiful, "You don't understand. Chris Webber needs Michigan to win a National Championship. Michigan does not need Chris Webber to win one." Lastly, from our own parochial swimming point of view, arguing college football players should be paid is simply nuts. You think every football scholarship athlete needs a stipend. Guess what part of the University's budget will take the hit to pay for that. Hint: it won't be the head football coach's six or seven figure salary. Think Div I swimming is under budgetary pressure now; in the idiom of Keith Jackson, "WHOA NELLIE!" Wait until you see what would happen next. Anyone who professes to care about swimming and be concerned about it as a college scholarship sport, and then turns around and argues college football and basketball players should be paid, deserves to smacked on the nose with a rolled up newspaper for piddling in our sandbox. There, I feel much better now. Thanks for letting me get that out of my system Matt P.S. GO BLUE!

This is a bit off of the swimming topic, but I profoundly disagree that a college scholarship has no monetary value and that poor, poor pitiful football and basketball players are so exploited by the wicked NCAA and their member coconspirators, er... institutions. This is nonsense from any one of a number of angles. You think college scholarship has no monetary value; talk to all the parents that save, scheme and obsess about how they will send their children to college. You argue that top flight athletes don't get an education. That may be true at some universities in some sports, but that is not the case in every school. Who picked the sports factory program where they got no education? Last time I checked, the NCAA has no draft. If an athlete decided to go to Whatsamatta U and failed to graduate because the team encouraged him to take blow-off classes, that was his choice. He and his family had options. Now let's take the big time programs that rake in the big bucks and even with lavish spending, it can still subsidize the other sports in the athletic department. (I am unaware of ANY university where the money programs make so much that it covers the AD, and refunds the excess to the University's general fund.) There is an underlying assumptions that fans pay big money because they want to see the current members of the team. That seems seductive, but let's be honest. As Jerry Seinfeld pointed out, we're not cheering for players, we're cheering for laundry. If a high school star decides to attend our hated rival, we'll hate his guts for next four years. Except for a few marquee players, we couldn't care less who carries the ball for dear old University, as long as he is better than the guy from evil empire University. And let's examine the marquee players, shall we? We love them because earlier in their college careers, when they were all freshman nerves and the whisper of a promise, they made big plays for dear old University, and we expect/hope they will do more of the same. We cheer for these guys because they are all wrapped up in our gauzy recollections of when we were students and all our fond memories of dear old University, and it makes us feel more important and like "winners" when these guys win championships and we can associate ourselves with them. Still don't believe me? Let me take the case from a minor money sport, womens basketball. Columbus OH used to have a womens professional team. Because it was a pro league, and there are generally fewer spots on all pro league rosters than there are spots on Div I basketball programs, I'm betting the Columbus pro team was substantially better than the Lady Buckeyes. Guess who drew higher average attendance, like three times higher. The Lady Buckeyes. It's NOT the individual players; it's the University. Chris Weber (in a rare moment of wisdom) was asked his rookie NBA year whether Michigan needed him to win an NCAA championship. His response was beautiful, "You don't understand. Chris Webber needs Michigan to win a National Championship. Michigan does not need Chris Webber to win one." Lastly, from our own parochial swimming point of view, arguing college football players should be paid is simply nuts. You think every football scholarship athlete needs a stipend. Guess what part of the University's budget will take the hit to pay for that. Hint: it won't be the head football coach's six or seven figure salary. Think Div I swimming is under budgetary pressure now; in the idiom of Keith Jackson, "WHOA NELLIE!" Wait until you see what would happen next. Anyone who professes to care about swimming and be concerned about it as a college scholarship sport, and then turns around and argues college football and basketball players should be paid, deserves to smacked on the nose with a rolled up newspaper for piddling in our sandbox. There, I feel much better now. Thanks for letting me get that out of my system Matt P.S. GO BLUE!