[CTcard]

SJ Merc endorses California legislation re athlete compensation
...

What I find striking is the weakness of the analysis.

I would agree with you, except calling whatever was in that op-ed piece "analysis" is overly indulgent.

Yes the current situation is problematic. But it is possible to make it worse.

Broadly speaking such logic is at the heart of much of what I dislike in what passes for discussion of the various ills of college sports.
There seem to be two versions of this.
Version #1: Things aren't perfect - so get rid of it all.
- College sports already have competitive balance problems, so lets get rid of everything that tries to promote such balance.
- Many college athletes don't get a good education, so let's get rid of every effort to promote them getting an education.
Version #2: No matter what the problem, it means we must pay the players.
- Many college athletes don't get a good education - so pay the players.
- Alabama has advantages over Ball State - so pay the players.
- College coaches make brobdingnagian salaries while colleges cut course offerings - so pay the players.

The solution to the problem is to let athletes go pro regardless of age etc, not to turn universities into semi pro leagues.

Unfortunately, I am not so optimistic that there is a solution to all that ails college athletics, much less anything that qualifies as the solution. Viable pro leagues open to any 18 year old would have plusses and minuses. It would tend to keep out of college most athletes who have no interest in college, or simply prefer other trade-offs to college, which I think would be a net positive. And beyond that, it does seem arbitrary to simply not allow 18 year olds. So I am for it - but that's just a piece.
 


I might actually be a supporter of the NCAA allowing payments for use of image and likeness by third parties, but I wish there were a more realistic discussion of what the current problem really entails and what trade offs are presented by various proposed solutions.

[CTcard]

SJ Merc endorses California legislation re athlete compensation
...

What I find striking is the weakness of the analysis.

I would agree with you, except calling whatever was in that op-ed piece "analysis" is overly indulgent.

Yes the current situation is problematic. But it is possible to make it worse.

Broadly speaking such logic is at the heart of much of what I dislike in what passes for discussion of the various ills of college sports.
There seem to be two versions of this.
Version #1: Things aren't perfect - so get rid of it all.
- College sports already have competitive balance problems, so lets get rid of everything that tries to promote such balance.
- Many college athletes don't get a good education, so let's get rid of every effort to promote them getting an education.
Version #2: No matter what the problem, it means we must pay the players.
- Many college athletes don't get a good education - so pay the players.
- Alabama has advantages over Ball State - so pay the players.
- College coaches make brobdingnagian salaries while colleges cut course offerings - so pay the players.

The solution to the problem is to let athletes go pro regardless of age etc, not to turn universities into semi pro leagues.

Unfortunately, I am not so optimistic that there is a solution to all that ails college athletics, much less anything that qualifies as the solution. Viable pro leagues open to any 18 year old would have plusses and minuses. It would tend to keep out of college most athletes who have no interest in college, or simply prefer other trade-offs to college, which I think would be a net positive. And beyond that, it does seem arbitrary to simply not allow 18 year olds. So I am for it - but that's just a piece.
 


I might actually be a supporter of the NCAA allowing payments for use of image and likeness by third parties, but I wish there were a more realistic discussion of what the current problem really entails and what trade offs are presented by various proposed solutions.