[lex24]

IMHO the NCAA has to either get out of the fairness side of the equation or the profit side of the equation.

I do not think this is a real choice.  If the NCAA gets out of the fairness side of the equation then Stanford and any other universities who have a shred of integrity will leave big-time sports. And then there are laws like Title IX to consider.  Who here thinks the NCAA is about to be hit with a massive Title IX lawsuit over the basketball tournaments?  

The more collegiate sports become professionalized, the more they are driven by economic interests, the more that compromises are made with academic values, the more that student-athletes become expendable employees in a quasi-labor market for running the collegiate athletics "business,"-- the closer we will come to Stanford exiting all high level sports.  It has already started, has it not?  I really think trends are against the beautiful and increasingly rare blending of high level academic and athletic talents that our university has attempted to create.  And that saddens me to no end.

Not sure what you mean by “high level sports”  There are  two income producing sports. Men’s basketball and football.  My guess is all others lose money.  Stanford dropped non incoming producing sports. 

Asking what is ”equality” on this is more difficult.  Leave aside the current FUBAR with the way the NCAA handled resources/ facilities at the Tourney. 

If you are to pay athletes, do you do so only for revenue producing sports?  And of course, how do you slice the pie.  Does DeVonta Smith get paid the same as the 4th string center? 

I’m all for players getting paid for use of their name and likeness.  But that will be limited to a few.  But in the end, if you go to any type of employment model, that will be the end of intercollegiate sports. (In fact, the only ones that possibly could survive would be football and Men’s Hoops.)   And I’m not sure how that helps.

I don't mean to single you out, but I think to some extent this tweet addresses your comment:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/FiveThirtyEight/status/1374813946125881346?s=20[/tweet]

There once was a time when the NFL was an afterthought, it didn't become a behemoth through happenstance, and it is not guaranteed to remain the premier professional league in the US forever.  Likewise, there is nothing fundamental about women's basketball that dooms it to unprofitability, and if I had to predict which sport would grow faster in the next 20 years, I'd pick WBB over MBB.

BC

How?  I’m talking today. Men’s basketball generates enormous revenue. Maybe someday women’s hoops will. But it doesn’t at this time.

[lex24]

IMHO the NCAA has to either get out of the fairness side of the equation or the profit side of the equation.

I do not think this is a real choice.  If the NCAA gets out of the fairness side of the equation then Stanford and any other universities who have a shred of integrity will leave big-time sports. And then there are laws like Title IX to consider.  Who here thinks the NCAA is about to be hit with a massive Title IX lawsuit over the basketball tournaments?  

The more collegiate sports become professionalized, the more they are driven by economic interests, the more that compromises are made with academic values, the more that student-athletes become expendable employees in a quasi-labor market for running the collegiate athletics "business,"-- the closer we will come to Stanford exiting all high level sports.  It has already started, has it not?  I really think trends are against the beautiful and increasingly rare blending of high level academic and athletic talents that our university has attempted to create.  And that saddens me to no end.

Not sure what you mean by “high level sports”  There are  two income producing sports. Men’s basketball and football.  My guess is all others lose money.  Stanford dropped non incoming producing sports. 

Asking what is ”equality” on this is more difficult.  Leave aside the current FUBAR with the way the NCAA handled resources/ facilities at the Tourney. 

If you are to pay athletes, do you do so only for revenue producing sports?  And of course, how do you slice the pie.  Does DeVonta Smith get paid the same as the 4th string center? 

I’m all for players getting paid for use of their name and likeness.  But that will be limited to a few.  But in the end, if you go to any type of employment model, that will be the end of intercollegiate sports. (In fact, the only ones that possibly could survive would be football and Men’s Hoops.)   And I’m not sure how that helps.

I don't mean to single you out, but I think to some extent this tweet addresses your comment:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/FiveThirtyEight/status/1374813946125881346?s=20[/tweet]

There once was a time when the NFL was an afterthought, it didn't become a behemoth through happenstance, and it is not guaranteed to remain the premier professional league in the US forever.  Likewise, there is nothing fundamental about women's basketball that dooms it to unprofitability, and if I had to predict which sport would grow faster in the next 20 years, I'd pick WBB over MBB.

BC

How?  I’m talking today. Men’s basketball generates enormous revenue. Maybe someday women’s hoops will. But it doesn’t at this time.