Fred
New member
- Joined:
- Mar 29, 2009
- Posts:
- 982
- Liked Posts:
- 7
"Though you did do a nice job of proving you don't know what you're talking about when discussing how college athletes don't deserve to be paid because the colleges should get 100% of the 100s of billions of dollars that these athletes generate." - Doug Thonus in the "Final Revised Case for Gordon Thread"
I somehow missed this shot. Although completely irrelevant to the topic we were discussing, it brings up an issue I've been itching to debate you on. So I challenge you to a mental duel on this topic. Your show or mine, I don't really care. But let me first give you a bit of my game plan, because I don't want this to turn into Pacquiao (Me) - De La Hoya (You).
Paying student athletes sounds great. After all, they bring in so much money to the universities. I used to be a big believer too. However, during my freshman year in college, I took a job during the school year (to help pay for my skyrocketing tuition) with the University of Illinois Foundation. It was a telemarketing job…I would call alumni and ask them to donate back to the university.
I became familiar with how a lot of that money from alumni, television contracts, etc are allocated and spent. I also became familiar with how every sport, besides men’s football and basketball for the most part, is a net loss for the University.
To make a very long and complicated story very short and simplistic(I haven't even mentioned Title 9 yet), a University has limited resources. By allocating some of those resources to pay student athletes, you’re taking resources away that could be used to help many academically gifted teenagers from poor families. You'll also hurt the total money available for student aid to poor kids with average academic backgrounds or even special needs.
Now, you could still say, "Hey, let’s keep those scholarships and grants in place, but also pay student athletes". Of course, that would mean an increase in our taxes. States play a major role in funding higher education through their support of public community colleges, university systems, and vocational education institutions. (Nationwide, This support accounts for about 12 percent of state spending, or some $125 billion.)
The state of Illinois is 9 million dollars in debt. So feel free to run for office on that argument with the Illinois taxpayer. I’m sure my wife and yours will be ecstatic to learn that some of their spending money will soon go to the state to help pay for student athletes at Northern, Western, Southern, etc…..for all these sports they couldn’t give a damn about(at least my wife doesn't). That would be on top of the increases we've already been hit with as disgusted residents of Cook County, Illinois. (Are in DuPage?)
More importantly, as a society, what should we be striving for? To pay student athletes for 4 years, and then throw them out in the world without an education, since they are no longer eligible for athletics? By paying them, we’re sending the message that their number 1 job is as an athlete, not as a student. They'll focus on that at the expense of their studies. And by paying them, we’ve taken away opportunities from academically gifted kids.
Instead of wasting our time and money in figuring out ways to pay student athletes, wouldn’t we be better off using our energies to help them understand how important and expensive a college education is. I’m proud to say that I paid for every dime of college education. I was lucky enough to get a job at the Nabisco plant on 79th during summers loading trucks to do it, plus several college loans. I finally paid those after 10 years in 2005. I know exactly, to the penny, how valuable and expensive that education was. If everyone, college athletes included, were better aware of this, we probably wouldn’t be having this debate.
In 08-09, For the University of Illinois, the tuition alone is $8,960 per term for residents, $21,714 for non-residents. When you add room and board and the meal plan, the total cost is around $16,000 per term for a resident. The student athlete pays none of this. Is this not a form of compensation?
During our argument on the basketball court, I only provided you with the crass benefits of being a student-athlete. Kevin Hardy, who I knew at the U of I, and possibly others on this forum, could attest that these benefits were real, enjoyable, & pretty freaking awesome. And he deserved them, because he worked hard in school and on the field. He was a class act, just like his teammate Simeon Rice, who always gave his best academically and athletically. (Kevin later became the 2nd overall pick in the NFL draft of the Jags back in the mid-90’s.)
There are other benefits. I’ll save these for our debate. But I challenge you to that debate. And we’ll let the listeners decide who wins, although since you have many more rabid fans, I’m sure the decision is already clear. If one more person is educated on this subject, I’ll be fine with that.
I somehow missed this shot. Although completely irrelevant to the topic we were discussing, it brings up an issue I've been itching to debate you on. So I challenge you to a mental duel on this topic. Your show or mine, I don't really care. But let me first give you a bit of my game plan, because I don't want this to turn into Pacquiao (Me) - De La Hoya (You).
Paying student athletes sounds great. After all, they bring in so much money to the universities. I used to be a big believer too. However, during my freshman year in college, I took a job during the school year (to help pay for my skyrocketing tuition) with the University of Illinois Foundation. It was a telemarketing job…I would call alumni and ask them to donate back to the university.
I became familiar with how a lot of that money from alumni, television contracts, etc are allocated and spent. I also became familiar with how every sport, besides men’s football and basketball for the most part, is a net loss for the University.
To make a very long and complicated story very short and simplistic(I haven't even mentioned Title 9 yet), a University has limited resources. By allocating some of those resources to pay student athletes, you’re taking resources away that could be used to help many academically gifted teenagers from poor families. You'll also hurt the total money available for student aid to poor kids with average academic backgrounds or even special needs.
Now, you could still say, "Hey, let’s keep those scholarships and grants in place, but also pay student athletes". Of course, that would mean an increase in our taxes. States play a major role in funding higher education through their support of public community colleges, university systems, and vocational education institutions. (Nationwide, This support accounts for about 12 percent of state spending, or some $125 billion.)
The state of Illinois is 9 million dollars in debt. So feel free to run for office on that argument with the Illinois taxpayer. I’m sure my wife and yours will be ecstatic to learn that some of their spending money will soon go to the state to help pay for student athletes at Northern, Western, Southern, etc…..for all these sports they couldn’t give a damn about(at least my wife doesn't). That would be on top of the increases we've already been hit with as disgusted residents of Cook County, Illinois. (Are in DuPage?)
More importantly, as a society, what should we be striving for? To pay student athletes for 4 years, and then throw them out in the world without an education, since they are no longer eligible for athletics? By paying them, we’re sending the message that their number 1 job is as an athlete, not as a student. They'll focus on that at the expense of their studies. And by paying them, we’ve taken away opportunities from academically gifted kids.
Instead of wasting our time and money in figuring out ways to pay student athletes, wouldn’t we be better off using our energies to help them understand how important and expensive a college education is. I’m proud to say that I paid for every dime of college education. I was lucky enough to get a job at the Nabisco plant on 79th during summers loading trucks to do it, plus several college loans. I finally paid those after 10 years in 2005. I know exactly, to the penny, how valuable and expensive that education was. If everyone, college athletes included, were better aware of this, we probably wouldn’t be having this debate.
In 08-09, For the University of Illinois, the tuition alone is $8,960 per term for residents, $21,714 for non-residents. When you add room and board and the meal plan, the total cost is around $16,000 per term for a resident. The student athlete pays none of this. Is this not a form of compensation?
During our argument on the basketball court, I only provided you with the crass benefits of being a student-athlete. Kevin Hardy, who I knew at the U of I, and possibly others on this forum, could attest that these benefits were real, enjoyable, & pretty freaking awesome. And he deserved them, because he worked hard in school and on the field. He was a class act, just like his teammate Simeon Rice, who always gave his best academically and athletically. (Kevin later became the 2nd overall pick in the NFL draft of the Jags back in the mid-90’s.)
There are other benefits. I’ll save these for our debate. But I challenge you to that debate. And we’ll let the listeners decide who wins, although since you have many more rabid fans, I’m sure the decision is already clear. If one more person is educated on this subject, I’ll be fine with that.