Was pulling your leg, as you well know. When I went to Muskingum, there wasn't an education major. I had 69 semester hours in social studies (anthropology, economics, history, philosophy, political science, religion, and sociology) and took some education courses. Their approach at the time was to emphasize a mastery of the subject matter. In fact, one of my education professors shared with me that he felt there were identifiable characteristics in incoming freshmen that could predict with a certain degree of reliability whether a student could/would become a successful teacher or not. I still think that would be a great PhD topic.

Not so fast... once you leave the revenue generating sports, the "athletes get compensated with scholarships" argument unravels.

NCAA Baseball limits teams to 11.7 scholarships. Softball gets 12. There's a lot of D-I athletes getting partial rides that have to go through the same pain and suffering as the general population. All athletes are equal, but some athletes are more equal than others.

I won't deny that several sports get pampered and understand anyone's frustration over perceived non-monetary compensation, but those sports do not make up the majority of beneficiaries when it comes to a study center or open food tables. They're just the ones we see on TV.

During the 73/74 Soccer season we had 1 scholarship that was spilt 3 ways.

The coach donated his time, because the athletic department eliminated his salary.

We had to buy our own cleats. When we played on Cleveland State's Astro Turf, we had to wear our regular sneakers.

When I wrestled at FDU we had 2 full (tuition/room and board) scholarships and a few scholarships that covered partial tuition.
At least we didn't have to buy our own shoes.

We competed because we loved the sports we participated in.

It takes a lot of time,effort and dedication to compete at the D1 level in any sport.
To me, something like the Sook Center which will assist athletes in their academic pursuits, especially when it is being built using donated funds ,offers nothing but positives.
I also think O.U. is being smart, in setting it up to also function as a visitors/reception center.

Sorry, I didn't explain it well. Uptown Friday and Saturday nights only!

Wes, in this case I don't think you have all the facts to make such a statement. This professor was far from being an "ivory tower" educator. He had been a classroom teacher, building principal, and superintendent before becoming an education professor. In other words he was in the field as opposed of going from BA to MA to PhD. His lessons were all about what we'd truly experience in the classroom as opposed to some pie in the sky philosophy of what should or might work. I agree with you that most incoming freshmen are not prepared to benefit from what college has to offer. That's why I favor two years of public service after high school before starting college. Grow up a bit before simply following the crowd for four more years of school. However, I do believe and to a certain extent I have anecdotally observed incoming college students who do have certain skills that lend themselves to success in the teaching profession. There are others who are very talented at what just do but would not make very good teachers. Patience would be one such characteristic and charisma would be another. As a 32 year veteran of the sales field, I would say that the same could be said for predicted success as a sales person, something many college grads will find themselves doing shortly after graduation especially when you consider that just 14 percent of this year’s college seniors have steady, career-type jobs lined up for their lives after graduation. Some folks have it and some will never have it.

Jeff, not sure if we are agreeing or not. What I am saying is that the ones we see on TV are getting a raw deal. This is some, not all.

I understand how the part scholarship game works, that is why I used Women's Volleyball as an example since it is full scholarship. My point is that when comparing DJ Cooper to a Volleyball player, it is clear that Cooper brings much more value to the University and both are being compensated easily. This is obviously a title 9, but i'm ignoring that for the sake of discussion.

I enjoy good discussions on the NCAA and College Athletics from this perspective. In general, the NCAA wants to have it both ways. They want to say it is all about student athletes, and then collect all the large amounts of money like it is a pro league.

Borna, always respect your well informed opinions. I guess where we differ is that I don't think the athletes that are driving the boat from a revenue standpoint should have to "suffer" because they are helping the greater good. There can be a socioeconomic debate here as well if you look at revenue sports vs non.

Paying athletes is very complicated, but I think it is relatively simple to let athletes make money off their own name(Endorsements, Autographs, etc). The argument about donors paying too much for that falls on deaf ears to me. Don't punish the student athletes because donors are sleazy.

Interesting perspective to be sure. Limited pay to certain athletes who can generate their own income.

So, these are amateur athletes....and you want to let them make their own cash like Pete Rose charging per autograph?

Donors giving a guy like DJ a sack of money for his likeness and an autograph while a guy like Asown is still in the same boat money wise trying to make ends meet falls on deaf ears.?....or do we respond to the cries of "unfair" and "inequitable" when they inevitably come from those who feel sorry for the guys not making top dollar? It's an interesting rabbit hole we seem to want to go down.

IMHO We would have never seen DJ because the Texas schools and others courting him would have had a better offer on the table. Still deaf? How about his team mates that are watching him drive his latest ride rolling on 23s trying to figure out where they stand in the locker room pecking order? (I gots mines fellas yall on ya own} Team dynamics and coaching then heads more toward managing egos that even Calipari who does a great job managing prima donnas would have some challenges. At some stage these athletes are still human and have egos. Locker rooms for the few who are in demand would IMO be a much different place kids on their own the first time away from home would not be prepared for in general and the learning/experience for most collegiate athletes would be vastly different. I am an advocate of kids from HS going straight to the pros and would love to see this path of amateur participation be unencumbered by the few who think they need to be paid....let em go and compete in an open marketplace. Screw college...they do not want to be there anyway.

On the subject of DJ....do you think he would have stayed after 2010 if a certain offer was made from a Power conference school along with the promise of an autograph deal? And if we would have seen him walk over to another campus and be immediately eligible....how would that have served him? With a one year transfer rule at least his mama would have been able to see him get his course work in order to stay on track to graduate at his new school. JC dropped that ball with the coaching change and I have oft wondered if Mom would not have let him go if she could have gone back. DJ did not get his degree on time as mama was promised when he committed here.


I understand the idea of the NCAA being a non profit being a joke (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2014/03/20/n... /) _and I understand that the coaches at the highest level are making scads of money and the idea that "this is all done on the backs of the athletes". There are so many levels to be considered. We are not in a club situation like Europe and I think the idea reaching down to HS sports like it does over there is not going to happen here. Amateur sports are still amateur sports in my eyes. The money issue has many sides and may not be as profitable as perceived http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Myth-College-Sports... to each individual institution

In the eyes of folks here .... there are 351 D1 schools with 13 basketball players.... Of those teams there are roughly 90 that have been relevant for the last 30 years. From NC, UK and KU to Wichita back to Sasha Dudovich...those same names have been there with a few new ones (butler, gonazaga) replacing a few old ones as examples(Depaul,St Johns) .... for the 260 other colleges that are not generating autograph paying names are we going to rewrite the rules, locker room demeanor, on campus experience for 351 schools for maybe 270 athletes across the country? Would you want OUr athletes like Treg or Jordan Dartis taking a buck from each 11 year old who wanted a keepsake signature on the program? How do you reconcile the interpersonal relationships when 19 year olds are sitting at a party experiencing college life at Ohio when one hoops star runs into baseball, football, volleyball players who see a guy with all the maturity of Johnny Manziel flaunting his newfound "profit sharing" in a sport that requires the same effort as theirs? Not that OUr athletes are not totally mature guys who operate with a huge degree of professionalism at all times and would be totally above doing something stupid with cash money or would ever react to someone who "disrespects" them on COurt Street after a few shots at Pawpurrs or hot nuts amongst friends.

I am not sure the answer is not to seriously look at the NCAA and the profit and distribution of the slush funds and endowment funds they keep putting together profits into. If they are truly member schools and the NCAA is run by the presidents then why are the presidents not finding ways to get money back to the member schools? The NCAA basketball tourney is the holy grail and funds many minor sports as well as much of the athletic calendars and championships. No one is going to put their hands on the neck of that Goose and twist it. My take is purely an opinion and a quest for the consensus. I am not sure what the answer is but I do realize that women's golf relies on hoops to exist. Baseball needs revenue sports to exist. Colleges with athletic programs benefit in tangible and non tangible ways in everything from admissions to community pride and involvement/support because of sports compared to those who do not....only 2 institutions that I can verify dropped out were Centenary and Birmingham SOuthern in the same time that we added a few dozen new programs. Places like Butler and even NKU have used their teams to grow the U. Must be something drawing them to the light like a herd of moths.

I think looking only at the gross numbers of coaching salaries and NCAA profit and not taking into account the benefits thousands of athletes actually derive is short sighted. I think the very vocal high profile guys in revenue sports distort our reality and stir the pot and do not reflect the 95% of all athletes competing in college who are happy to have a partial ride and the gear/experience/benefit of playing on and being part of something bigger that will benefit them in many ways for a lifetime.

Alan, the idea of requiring 2 year of public service out of high school is a great idea. The world has changed since 1960 when industry needed college grads that were 22 to hit the workforce immediately. It was realized then that times had changed since 1900 when most 14 year olds were expected to make a financial contribution to the households. Its 2016 and industry doesn't have the capacity to absorb the number of college grads anymore so it makes sense to change the system again. Some say that too many people are going to college that would be better directed toward trades but I disagree with that approach. Trades should be opportunities for non-college age immigrants to gain social mobility with a good paying job. With academia there is a tendency to view their relationship with students as an employee-employer relationship where a student is not delivering and that I think isn't appropriate for the sitting. If alternatively you hired a 32 year old salesman with experience and a track record and after 8 months he's not delivering then its fair to say he doesn't have what it takes to deliver for your organization. That is totally different. The story for a lot of professors is they had the maturity at a young age to move into a PhD program but are ignorant in many ways and that ignorance was never challenged because they could ride the coattails of their research into a career. They don't make great educators and they don't make great mentors either.

+100