Shocking headline: athletes on full-ride scholarships still end up spending some money at college. I haven't quite figured out the "shocking" part yet. As I started digging, I just got more and more irritated.
First, as with most studies, this one is funded by an organization that has an agenda, in this case the National College Players Association (NCPA). According to their own website, their number one goal is to "raise the scholarship amount." Again, directly from their website: "The NCAA admits that a 'full scholarship' does not cover the basic necessities for a college athlete, but it refuses to change its rules to allow schools to provide more scholarship money."
Within the statement is a big assumption, and that is that college athletes have the right (insert rant about our "entitlement" society here) to not pay a dime when they go to college for four - hmm - I mean one or two years. The study notes that the average Division I "full-scholarship" athlete has to pay $2951 annually in "school-related expenses not covered by grants-in-aid." Not surprisingly, I could not find a complete list of these school-related expenses used in the study, although the press release mentioned three things: parking fees, calculators, and computer disks. I cannot confirm it, but I suspect the list includes things like baggy jeans, snazzy boxer shorts, two pairs of Nike Air Force Ones, a MacBook Pro, an iPod, and two plane tickets home (for Christmas and Thanksgiving).
Second, if you go to the NCPA website to look further into this study, they throw up the scholarship "shortfalls" against the coach's income and bonus money. The implication is that coaches shouldn't get that money, that the players should get it so that they don't have to spend their own money at the iTunes store. My question is, what is it that normally draws an athlete to a particular school? I don't know that the coach is the number one reason, but it's gotta be in the top three. So for schools to get those big recruits in the first place, to grow a program to the point that it can provide scholarships in the first place, you've got to get top tier coaches. So why would you go after them? You both know that I've had my issues with college athletics in the past, but after doing my research, I fully understand that the bulk of athletic scholarships in any Division I school, and even many of the academic scholarships, are funded by the football and basketball programs. It's pure profit. Coaches are paid with pure profit. My point is, the coach gets much of the credit, in my opinion, for scholarships existing at all. Going after them in this pathetic "full-ride athletes don't get enough money" complaint is ridiculous.
Third, I think most of the population would agree that compared to the average joe that wants to go to college, I don't think athletes have much to complain about. Let's take for example USC. According the the 2010-2011 catalog, the average cost per semester for an undergraduate education is $20K. Yes my friends, that was for a SEMESTER. So you're looking at $40K per year if you're not an athlete. According to the U of I website, cost of attendance is around $36K a year, and ISU around $30K. Duke University will cost you around $55K. Clemson, who is listed in the study as the BCS school with the largest gap for "full-ride" athletes at $4700, costs around $26K to attend for a year. Keep in mind that these figures are also for in-state residents; the cost for many scholarshiped athletes would probably include out-of-state tuition costs.
In anticipation of my previous paragraph, the NCPA has a section of their website entitled, "The 'Free Ride' - Should We Complain?" In general, I think it's a joke, but the last line of the page REALLY pisses me off. It says, "We should not have to keep quiet while being subjected to unethical conditions." UNETHICAL CONDITIONS? Are you serious?
Look, let's quit beating around the bush and get to the bottom of this: College athletics is a multi-million dollar industry. It is money, money, money. No doubt about it. The NCPA has one agenda which it is trying to cover with a lot of smoke-screen issues like guaranteed four-year scholarships, medical coverage, unlimited transfer options, graduation rates, etc. But the REAL agenda is that the NCPA wants to tap into those millions of dollars that college athletes generate. That's it. Regardless of what they say, they don't give a crap about education or anything associated with it. They want college athletes to be compensated like professional athletes. They want the money. They can't stand the fact that big-time college athletes have to pay anything while at college.
Compensation for college athletes is a separate issue for another day...
No comments:
Post a Comment