Athlete stipends...

An interesting story by ESPN here... Link

So much for amateur athletics I suppose. You could call me "old-school," but these athletes don't need to be paid more. Their pay should be considered their education (that many one-and-done's seem to miss) -- on top of the fact that their tuition, housing, and food is already paid for.

Also, Skip makes the comment that schools should be allowed to bid for the highest athletes and that the balance of power would not be shifted. That may be partially true, but completely oblivious to the schools like Gonzaga, Butler, St. Mary's, and VCU who couldn't buy the best players (who currently have shown that they can dominate at a sport). Also, if that were true, you could kiss UP's ability to compete D-I goodbye.

I realize that some colleges make millions off of their athletes, but the reality is that most colleges do not. I would not say that UP makes millions off of their athletes. All NCAA D-II and -III programs and NAIA programs don't make more than a couple thousand per program if they are even making a profit.

However, I do agree that a lot of colleges exploit their athletes in order to make money. No doubt about that.

PrideofthePilots wrote:
So much for amateur athletics I suppose.

I'm afraid this concept is lost among most people.