They get to go to school for free and over four years save themselves either around $60,000 (for a public school) or $200,000 (for a private school). The first response you will hear to that question is that athletes are getting paid-with college scholarships. But since the athletes are the ones responsible for generating all that revenue, don't they deserve a share of it? Much of that money goes to support other unprofitable athletic programs, women's sports in particular.īoth the NCAA and every university are non-profit institutions, so it's not like the cash is going in somebody's pocket. Big programs like Texas, Michigan and Georgia are responsible for up to $60 million each. According to a New York Times article, in 2005 the 121 Division I-A football teams generated an incredible $1.8 billion for their schools between ticket sales, merchandising and sponsorships. The schools themselves make even more money from athletics. In its most recent budget the NCAA claimed $710 million in revenue, almost entirely from lucrative television and marketing deals. The NCAA is a cash cow and one of the highest-grossing athletic governing bodies in the world. Should athletes, in fact, be compensated for their play? Newton's family has said that the representative, identified as former Ole Miss player Kenny Rogers, acted without Newton's knowledge or approval.īut whether or not the allegations are true, the Cam Newton saga raises interesting questions about the college recruitment process. Under NCAA regulations, it is illegal for a recruit to receive any form of financial compensation, whether it's cash, expensive gifts or benefits.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |