(no title)
Zanta
|
4 years ago
An argument presented in this case is that increased pay to college athletes will incentivize them to spend more time on their athletics and less on their academics.
How convincing do you find that argument, applied to athletes in a) Top Tier D1 Football programs, b) D1 programs but for less hyper-commercialized sports (say track, or volleyball), and c) D2 or D3 athletes with little-to-no aspirations of a future in professional athletics
jalgos_eminator|4 years ago
This is how baseball works, and all the baseball players I met actively wanted to be in college. Some of them even turned down $100k-$500k draft signing bonuses to play college ball.
tw04|4 years ago
Honestly the focus (or lack thereof) on education starts at home.
source: also played college sports.
elpakal|4 years ago
my experience was waking up before the crack of dawn to pre-train, going to school in the morning, and then spending the rest of any free time I had after training (be it weights, cardio, practice etc). and then you watch film. all for the love (scholarships were nice) - so anyone that suggests there is more time to spend on athletics at these levels, and that paying athletes will somehow encourage them to do so vs academia, deserves a flan in the face.