Saw some figures today

The NFL and NBA have allocated a portion of league revenues to their players in their collective bargaining agreements, and MLB tried to do the same before settling for pro rata pay after play resumes next month. All three of those were in the vicinity of 50% of league revenue.

Today I saw the same figure for college athletics. What portion of total revenue goes to college athletes for scholarships and books and meals?

Twelve percent. One dozen.

Want to tell me again that a scholarship is fair compensation?

By the way, the WNBA isn’t much better; their players get 22 percent. And they’re still losing money.

IMO a scholarship should be intended to provide an opportunity for a young person to: One, get a college education. Two, use that education to get a job. If it ends up being profssional sports, fine. But if not, use the degree for a better life.

Sadly college sports is now simply big business.

1 Like

Now in your equation happened about 25 years ago – when the SEC expanded with Arkansas and South Carolina. Again, tell me about the vision that Frank Broyles had. Remarkable.

1 Like

If I remember correctly, Texas and A&M also planned to drop the SWC and go with us to the SEC but the Texas powers forced the schools to back off. But Arkansas made the right decision IMO.

It was something like that. Baylor supporter Ann Richards, the fiesty Texas governor, got in the way of all of that happening.

A full ride to the UofA and most colleges is a great compensation, especially if a person is unable to do it by themselves. I can only relate to myself. I have had a great life (so far). I am not rich, but I am ok. Other than family and all that, those Degrees from the University of Arkansas are at the top of the list as to how that came about. There are other, but without those degrees, and my college experiences, I can’t see how it would be as good.

What is the ability to have a great life worth? Of course, that is not the only pathway and a person does not have to have it, but it sure does help.

Now, of course, when a person is given that opportunity, they must take advantage of it. That is on the individual. It makes me sick when so many who have been given that opportunity just blow it away. Pick a REAL Major and soak it up. All a person has to do is show an interest and they will be taken under the wing of someone that will open more doors than could ever be walked through, but you must seek it out and take advantage.

1 Like

Ann Richards for BU, and powerful West Texas people in the legislature took care of TTech.

Yes, college sports is big business, and that toothpaste ain’t going back in the tube. Either the schools take better care of the athletes on their own, or Congress and state legislatures will force it. California and Florida have already passed state laws on athlete compensation. That toothpaste isn’t going back in the tube either.


This narrative fully supports my previous argument about the absurdity of the lack of scholarships for baseball and the non-revenue sports. The Power Five ADs and Chancellors need to take a proactive approach in providing greater amount of scholarships. The $$$ is there but the priorities are not.


1 Like

I agree 100%. Arkansas is an example proving baseball can actually be profitiable. I think all scholarships should be full.

1 Like

If you make a job (NBA) analogous to getting an education, then your argument holds water as it relates to fairness. In essence all NBA players share the revenue, and compensation is based on basketball abilities.

If the comparison is some students vs other students and what they should receive in help in getting an education, it isn’t fair at all based upon academic qualifications. In essence some students get assistance towards education based upon their basketball abilities vs. academic abilities. But somewhere in the societal system there is value in having “athletic” based scholarships for receiving an education. And it certainly helps create college degrees for many that wouldn’t have qualified based upon purely academic credentials.

Maybe the NFL should just franchise college football teams as a B league and the college players don’t need to attend college at all. Then the NFL and the revenue it receives can be responsible for all of the infrastructure, coaches and players salaries etc.

Personally I’ve always believed that what makes college sports special is that these are “students” and somehow part of the university community. Yes the players have always enjoyed some additional status on campus and off… and they do get an education paid for that many other students or their parents have to work, get loans etc. to obtain.

I get that a lot of people are making money off a group of kids who are getting a free education as compensation and that doesn’t seem fair. But I will argue that if college athletes received pay in a similar system to professional leagues, what makes college sports special would be lost…or maybe it would just be lost for me. It would be equivalent to watching minor league sports, which I and many don’t do. I’m probably wrong in this modern era, but I hope I’m not, because it’s headed that way.

1 Like

I agree 100% hognc. College sports is the last level before pro. Turning it into semi-pro will chase many fans off and make it less interesting. Your minor league example is a good one. I’ve been to some Natural games and would pull for them any night they play. But I’ve been to many more Hog baseball games with three times the crowd and excitement and I believe some of that will fade away. Playing college sports allows a young person to get a free education, free room and board, free travel to see much of the country, lifetime friends and experiences that most people under 23 years old will never get. The one area that I can bend on is pocket money. A lot of these guys and gals come in and between studying, practicing, going to class, travel…They don’t have time to make extra money. Maybe have a small stipend ($300 per month) just to have some pocket money (go out to eat and catch a movie). All athletes on scholarship would get the exact same amount. Just an idea that would be somewhat of a compromise.

This is just me, but what they get paid doesn’t matter to me. A walk-on, full scholarship, stipend, NLI payments, endorsements, whatever. They said allowing professionals would ruin the Olympics. Well, the Olympics are plenty screwed up but allowing professionals to compete isn’t why.

If they’re wearing cardinal red with Arkansas on the front, I’m going to support them whether they get a paycheck or not. In fact I’d rather know that their needs are being addressed beyond what they can legally receive now.

1 Like

Swine, these athletes are not professionals. They are amateur athletes. They get a college education paid for. What is that worth?..getting a college education is probably worth at least a million dollars in extra salary in one’s lifetime and the ability to work in a profession. It is hard to quantify, but a college degree is huge. It gives a person a great opportunity to succeed in life.

This isn’t socialist Italy where everybody works 30 hours and retires at 50. You see how that worked out for the Italians. An education paid for is a good deal for most any student and parent. These athletes should be grateful for the free education and make sure they get a degree while they are in college.

Very much agree on the pocket money. They have so many rules that don’t allow them to work…and they have so little time to do that, I totally agree on the pocket money side. Many of these athletes don’t come to school with pocket money access…except for the ones who get big checks from ?

Not an expert on the subject, but maybe the Olympics was not a great example. Is it possible the inclusion of professionals had more to do with winning medals than concern for the economic hardships, since it seems that many American athletes who compete in some of the Olympic sports work outside of their sport or event to support their living and training prior to the Olympics?

The inclusion of professionals was an acknowledgement that amateurism is an anachronistic remnant. It excluded the best athletes in the world for no good reason other than once upon a time the nobility didn’t want to compete against common people who actually had to work for a living. And amateurism in college sports is to cut costs and avoid paying worker’s comp. There is no good reason. “That’s the way it’s always been” is not a good reason. That excuse would have preserved slavery, segregation, sexual discrimination and all sorts of other abuses that were once approved by society.

Jhawg it’s a matter of degree. A scholarship is paying athletes for their services, just as much as LeBron James or Dak Prescott is getting paid. The only difference is that Dak was able to negotiate to get something resembling his actual value. College athletes can’t. And that violates antitrust law. That’s already been decided, whether you like it or not.

The response sure got deeper into a snapshot of the sins (real or otherwise) of the past than what I would have expected, until I went back to the original post. Guess I should have been more perceptive in ascertaining the difference between a post seeking discussion and one that is not.

Personally opinion only.( I suppose all opinions are personal.)
The cost side of all departments at all universities must be re-examined. The amount of money being spent on administrators and administration is preposterous. Too many people making money that are contributing so little to the actual education of the students. This includes the athletic departments.

The distinction is long gone. I think it’s fine for things like golf where people want to hold an amateur tournament & exclude professionals, but the fact is, college sports is in fact big business & the top athletes in the money sports make the schools a bundle of money. I see no reason to keep them from getting a decent piece of the pie.

My only fear is that it becomes a bidding war with full & free annual transfers. If it comes to that, I think college football will have lost something. But I can’t say the loss, primarily to me, is one that justifies exploiting athletes who make big money for the schools.

Let’s face it, baseball lost a certain something when the reserve clause went away, but I can’t say it was right that owners could exploit players that way. If we believe in a free market, we believe in a free market for everyone–even football & basketball players. You can’t complain about socialism and turn around & tell players they can’t use their skills to get more for themselves than a simple scholarship.

So who determines who gets what? do you throw a bunch of money in the pot and distribute it equally, or do you base it on ability, that opens up a whole different can of worms, not to mention jealousy hard feelings and there goes any team unity.

I think people ought to think this over very carefully.

1 Like