Well,

thats nice.....throwing the race card.

Race has not one thing to do with it. It is all about the money. How many concerted efforts to load HS swim teams, cross country teams, golf teams are a result of playing together on an AAU  and tehn transfer HS to play together are borne of a desire to be more marketable? OJ Mayo and Crew heading off to NOrth College Hill (notenough balls to play in the top Division) in order to market him as the next LeBron and take advantage of the OHSAA rules as opposed to those in  WV/KY is a great example. WHen this goes on starting in 6th/7th grade and players are found out later to be overaged AFTER they have won several national tourneys and garnered 5 years of  the publicity and recruiting hype that came with winning you can see what goes into creating the "next NBA gazillionaire". If the transfer rule goes away this brings those same things into the college game and the same corruption that exists and everyone detests in AAU ball muddies up the college game. I do not see that level of greed, corruption, shoe company and sponsor money existing in your so called "white" sports.

It is all about greedy parents, and handlers,  misguided players and their obsession with the money and not at all about the color of anyone's skin. Shame on you.

that may be but on the surface this very high profile non profit, in their online explanations are giving the impression that they are returning the money to the member schools. I do not see the member schools raising hell about not seeing it or implying that the financials are implicitly wrong.

Since this topic has been lingering a few days, ......, that is not a good thing for the academic institutions as a whole.
\.

You're right. I should not have implied the NCAA wasn't doing, money-wise, exactly what they claimed. I can complain about college presidents, athletic directors, and coaches gaming the system so they reap the biggest profits, but that's a complaint I can copy to myriad organizations, churches, and corporations.

Questions I have about that 95% include whether it's the right thing to do to extract every dollar possible from basketball players in order to subsidize other sports (especially when football has all but juked out of this.

My problems with the 5% they keep include their capricious, hypocritical enforcement of rules, their micro-managing to a self-satirical degree, their self-righteous attitude, questions about the details that have come out in the Miami case, and the sense that all their rulings and laws seem to favor schools or itself but never the actual athletes they claim to protect and be there for.

It's not a question of who is better off, blah, blah,blah. Of course a kid is better off with a college degree. If the school athletic teams are behaving like professional business with a profit motive such that some are, then the kids are not being fairly compensated. How many of you earn 50k a year(I'm being generous with the analogy) while your boss earns 2-7 million and the company makes even more? You've got 12- 15 employees, who are really the talent and bring in the money and they all make 50k and the boss makes 2-7M? How long would that last? It wouldn't. I predict it won't be too long before changes occur.

It doesn't matter if you buy their explanation or not. The evidence provided clearly shows that it isn't a decision based on race.  I think the truth is pretty much about what borna said it was. It's about money.  The four sports mentioned are the sports that are likely to have the most incentive for corruption.  I have no idea if statistics give any credibility to the NCAA statement either.  But it doesn't matter if that's the case or not.  The whole point of my post was that your "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" arguement that this was just another way to keep the black man down is way beyond ludicrous.