The current system is based on the principles of socialism, where every athlete receives the same thing, regardless of their success. They get a free education, room and board, nutritional training, healthcare, academic support, etc, and the third string player with a scholarship gets exactly the same as the star.
[/QUOTE]I get what you're saying here, but some of this is incorrect. Other parts are an idealized view of how the NCAA/Universities actually operate.

For instance, the star player and the third string guy aren't actually treated equally. The star never has his scholarship pulled, the third string guy does pretty frequently. Further, the third string guy may have only been offered a partial scholarship to begin with. It may cover only a portion of costs.

Also, you might want to look into how healthcare actually works in college athletics. In many, many cases players' health insurance plans and costs aren't covered by the university. Universities require them to have insurance, but in practice many are on their parents' plans.

Alabama, for instance, covers 100% of costs. If you play basketball at Maine on the other hand, you pay the first $10,000 of any healthcare cost.

[QUOTE=L.C.]
In all of this prediction, I see great irony. The people who normally support socialism are the ones who most strongly favor abandoning the current socialist system, while those that normally favor free enterprise are the ones who strongly support the current system.

...

For instance, the star player and the third string guy aren't actually treated equally. The star never has his scholarship pulled, the third string guy does pretty frequently. Further, the third string guy may have only been offered a partial scholarship to begin with. It may cover only a portion of costs.
... [/quote]
Certainly some schools are more aggressive about pulling scholarships than others. The other part of your statement is incorrect. While some sports do have partial scholarships, football is not one of them.

Blame the coaches salaries on impatient fans, who always seem to believe that if they just get the right coach, they can win a National Championship. As for the "workers", consider that in a truly capitalistic system, there would be no scholarships at all in non-revenue sports. Thus, anyone who gets a scholarship in one is getting more than they have "earned".

[QUOTE=Brian Smith]Funny enough, I was thinking about this exact thing while my mind was wandering while working the other night. It goes to show how much cognitive dissonance we all allow into our thinking no matter our core beliefs when it comes to things we love. I really don't blame either side. One side loves college football as it is and is willing to overlook a lot to maintain it. The other really doesn't like what has happened to the priorities of universities and is willing to argue for a system they'd otherwise hate.

I understand both, but think we should always err towards the individual having the right to do what they feel best.

It's likely blowing up the system will turn disastrous, but if we're going to really live up to what we preach, adults can't be treated like children in this situation and we can't keep subsidizing the sports that don't make money just because we like the idea of a fair and just college athletics system. Not when so many of our colleges and universities are struggling so much.

Certainly some schools are more aggressive about pulling scholarships than others. The other part of your statement is incorrect. While some sports do have partial scholarships, football is not one of them.

Blame the coaches salaries on impatient fans, who always seem to believe that if they just get the right coach, they can win a National Championship. As for the "workers", consider that in a truly capitalistic system, there would be no scholarships at all in non-revenue sports. Thus, anyone who gets a scholarship in one is getting more than they have "earned".


Well said.

Each year I get more convinced that the days of college sports are fading. What began as little more than a club sport in the 1880s has grown into big business, only loosely connected to the core mission of the universities. The current system is based on the principles of socialism, where every athlete receives the same thing, regardless of their success. They get a free education, room and board, nutritional training, healthcare, academic support, etc, and the third string player with a scholarship gets exactly the same as the star.

With virtually every university losing money at athletics, the day is coming when football, and perhaps other sports, will be spun off from universities and replaced by some sort of free enterprise variant. The players will be compensated, with the best athletes getting more than they do now, but with the majority getting less. In the end, each athlete will be compensated based on their ability to generate revenue. Sports that generate little revenue will return to their former status, club sports, where people do it for fun, and for the spirit of competition.

In all of this prediction, I see great irony. The people who normally support socialism are the ones who most strongly favor abandoning the current socialist system, while those that normally favor free enterprise are the ones who strongly support the current system.