http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2419723 "I think [collegiate] athletes should get paid," Bush told ESPN.com recently. "Maybe not as much as NFL players, but they have to get something more than they get now." I totally don't agree. They have enough perks going from them. And this would lead to some unionization. The college game is adulterated enough.
he's trying to cover his ass now. whatch in time its going to come out that USC is not playing by the rules. Lets watch the "Dyanasty" burn.:angryfire
He is right. It's almost indentured servitude for these players considering what schools make off the football programs.
They should be paid. A scholarship and free shoes are fine for the guys at the end of the bench, but wouldn't you feel slighted if you knew that 100,000 people paid roughly $50 dollars to see you play and you didn't see a dime of that? You could walk around your campus and see 10 kids wearing your exact jersey and know you won't be seeing any of that revenue. A guy could rush for 2,000 yards one year, break his leg the next and it's goodbye scholarship - with nothing to show for it. Reggie Bush could go on the Tonight Show and he has to refuse his appearance fee. Just what in the hell is that? They wouldn't let that kid Bloom come back and play for Colorado because he had skiing endorsements. Of course, if they were to be paid it would ruin the sport. So for very selfish reasons I hope it never happens. But it goes against Free Market Capitalism which I love so very much.
Top athletes get a lot more than tangible support (i.e. tuition, books, etc.). They also benefit from a considerable amount of promotion and development directly influencing their future professional career. The money a top player receives in the draft reflects the achievements made as a college player. The NFL will reward players like Bush with a premium salary, exceeding that of the average existing pro-player, reflecting his outstanding college career. Is the system perfect, no. But, I think no one can deny that college athletics consistently produces millionaires right out of school - even those without degrees. How often does the system produce an athlete who, after attending a first tier school in the respective sport, played well, and ranked high amongst his peers, could not then attain a lucrative professional career. There certainly are no guaranteers, but in what career do such exist? There is a line of candidates a mile long because college athletics produces millionaires. If there were a better route, say some foreign league or sub-tier pro league where players would get paid, it would exist. Bush needs to appreciate he got a lot more than tuition, room, and books. If it were the case, the NFL would not waste their time with him, nor would he be paid more than some guy who has proven himself in pro play. Bush and others like him are getting their money, after the fact, but paid nonetheless. He could always try going to medical, law, or some top MBA school, where he won't be getting paid either.
Along these lines, I'm not so sure that tuition and free medical care and all that is everything that these players get. I love LSU and would never want to see us cheat or go under the table or anything, but I see these players on campus (I live in West Campus Apartments where most of the players do) and some of the cars they have? You can't tell me that they afforded Cadillac Escalades with 22' rims and kickin stereos by saving up money, and I'm pretty sure (not that I'm generalizing but from what I've heard about some of these guys) that their families could not afford to buy them almost $100,000 worth of car stuff. I have always been a little suspicious, but that doesn't mean I love LSU or this team any less, I'm just a little curious how these guys can afford cars that only CEOs drive.
The second they get paid, they are professional athletes. They don't pay students to go to college. These athletes receive a lot of benefits, money need not be one of them.
Even if his point is valid, he sure picked the wrong time to state it. Who is handling his PR anyway ?
When my dad played at Southern Miss in the early 60's, scholarship athletes were paid about $20 a month in "laundry money." It was allowed by the NCAA. Obviously, they didn't use the money to do laundry; it paid for movies, eating out, dates, etc. My dad needed that money because he was from a poor background, the first in his family not only to go to college, but to even graduate from high school. Without athletics, he'd never have gone to college. I don't see anything wrong with the guys today getting some sort of allowance of $200-300 for such incidental expenses. Many of our athletes today come from similar backgrounds as my dad did back in 1960. In 1960, the education my dad was receiving free of charge meant little-to-nothing to him. But...what it allowed was for him to break out of the cycle of generational poverty from which he'd emerged. He went to college, I went to college, my daughters will go to college--hopefully, all future generations will go to college. Without athletics, that would not have been possible. My life would likely be much different. The free education doesn't impress these guys, by and large. To help them resist outside temptation, I believe the athletes should be paid something for their services. They make gobs of money for their universities. If they had enough money to "go out," that would put them on a more even keel with other, richer students. Remember, they can't work during the year like other economically disadvantaged students can.
