Did you have a job in college? Did you have to work to pay for school, housing, social life, books, car, insurance, family, etc?
Now imagine that you are a college athlete. You work hard for your sport. You sacrifice your time and your body for your school. You work at least as hard and more likely harder than anyone else in school and yet you don't get financially compensated for it. Many argue that scholarships are compensation; maybe. I say thats not nearly enough.
Now before you revert back to old stereotypes, hear me out. I've had many friends that were athletes in college. My favorite college job was in the computer lab in the Smith Field House at BYU helping out college athletes. They work hard! If they are not traveling for games they are in the weight room or swimming pool or running across the country. All colleges and universities, on some level, point to their athletic progam as a status symbol. These athlete bring status and prestige to their schools. Other departments do it too. They point to their medical program or business school and say "See... Look! We have one of the top programs in the country!" Why do they do this? One word: Money. Schools need money. The reason schools build gigantic stadiums that only get used a handful of times per year is because of money. They make money. I once heard that the football program brings in enough money to cover its own costs AND cover ALL THE OTHER SPORTS (except men's basketball). Football pays the bills.
Coach K from Duke does commercials and gets paid for them. Local coaches have their faces on billboards for car dealerships and communication companies. Athletes, those who actually do the work, get nothing. Is this fair? I say no! Of course not. The only reason they don't get paid is because of the concern that athletes will be swayed by boosters. Well... so what? If a computer scientist writes a program at school for a project and then sells that program, he gets paid for it. Whats the difference? I say none.
Many would argue that universities are institutes of higher learning and emphasis should not be placed on athletics. That we go there to learn, study, and broaden our minds. That's true. Kinda. Most of us go to college so we can have a better job. Make more money. I know, I know... the purists will tell me they went to learn. I did too. But at the same time if we all did that we would just study the philosophy of whatever subject we majored in. But that's not all of it. Universities as I see it are to make people better. Physically, mentally, spiritually, socially, or whatever. The same people that posit the same argument also argue that everyone is different and have different skills. I say that's true. Some people are born athletes. Some are born scientists. One gets paid, so should the other one.
If students are allowed to major in what interests them, then I say let the athletes major in athletics if they want to. Why put up with the sham majors? During college football season they run commercials that say something to the effect of "student athletes, 95% of us don't go on to play professional sports". So I says they should major in something that can provide them with a better lifestyle. Let the other 5% major in sports.
Please. Disagree with me. I would like some feedback.
- Demosthenes
Now imagine that you are a college athlete. You work hard for your sport. You sacrifice your time and your body for your school. You work at least as hard and more likely harder than anyone else in school and yet you don't get financially compensated for it. Many argue that scholarships are compensation; maybe. I say thats not nearly enough.
Now before you revert back to old stereotypes, hear me out. I've had many friends that were athletes in college. My favorite college job was in the computer lab in the Smith Field House at BYU helping out college athletes. They work hard! If they are not traveling for games they are in the weight room or swimming pool or running across the country. All colleges and universities, on some level, point to their athletic progam as a status symbol. These athlete bring status and prestige to their schools. Other departments do it too. They point to their medical program or business school and say "See... Look! We have one of the top programs in the country!" Why do they do this? One word: Money. Schools need money. The reason schools build gigantic stadiums that only get used a handful of times per year is because of money. They make money. I once heard that the football program brings in enough money to cover its own costs AND cover ALL THE OTHER SPORTS (except men's basketball). Football pays the bills.
Coach K from Duke does commercials and gets paid for them. Local coaches have their faces on billboards for car dealerships and communication companies. Athletes, those who actually do the work, get nothing. Is this fair? I say no! Of course not. The only reason they don't get paid is because of the concern that athletes will be swayed by boosters. Well... so what? If a computer scientist writes a program at school for a project and then sells that program, he gets paid for it. Whats the difference? I say none.
Many would argue that universities are institutes of higher learning and emphasis should not be placed on athletics. That we go there to learn, study, and broaden our minds. That's true. Kinda. Most of us go to college so we can have a better job. Make more money. I know, I know... the purists will tell me they went to learn. I did too. But at the same time if we all did that we would just study the philosophy of whatever subject we majored in. But that's not all of it. Universities as I see it are to make people better. Physically, mentally, spiritually, socially, or whatever. The same people that posit the same argument also argue that everyone is different and have different skills. I say that's true. Some people are born athletes. Some are born scientists. One gets paid, so should the other one.
If students are allowed to major in what interests them, then I say let the athletes major in athletics if they want to. Why put up with the sham majors? During college football season they run commercials that say something to the effect of "student athletes, 95% of us don't go on to play professional sports". So I says they should major in something that can provide them with a better lifestyle. Let the other 5% major in sports.
Please. Disagree with me. I would like some feedback.
- Demosthenes
3 comments:
Another perspective: One of the guys here at work majored in construction. He did an internship with our company. He got paid pennies but did 110% grunt work. He was expected to be the first one there, the last one to leave, and wait, WHY ARE YOU TAKING A LUNCH BREAK?! After he graduated and was offered a position with the company, he now has a decent salary and more tolerable working hours.
you said that the players do all the work but the coaches get the glory and the paycheck. I think interns are treated pretty similarly. They do most of the work and get little if any of the credit. Think of the athletes like interns.
My internship was three months long, 32 hours a week. I got paid $100. That's a little more than a quarter an hour.
"If a computer scientist writes a program at school for a project and then sells that program, he gets paid for it. Whats the difference? I say none."
in this example, there is a difference. the difference is that if the guy sells the program, it's not the SCHOOL that actually pays him. it would likely be some kind of software company or something. with this in mind, athletes have the same opportunity for that outside source of income when an outside company, such as the nfl or nba, hires them for their services.
but does this make everything ok how it is? not by a long shot. the computer scientist in question was able to write that progam as a computer scientist major. the footballer had to spend all his college career working 60 hours a week devoted to football, but he still had to major in communications.
why can't he just major in football?
yeah, everyone reading this is laughing now, but why not? what are athletes anyway? they're entertainers. they hoping to make it big just like actors or dancers. those people can actually major in the theater arts or dance. they can devote their entire collegiate career toward their dreams, but footballers have to devote themselves to something they obviously don't care about.
i know what you may be thinking. yeah, but acting and dance, those are ARTS. maybe so. personally, even as artistic as i pretend to be i don't really see much difference in arts and entertainment. it's more of a sliding scale than a division. that's not even important though. let's throw that aside. the point is -- since when do we HAVE to major in the arts in college? my degree says bachelor of arts (*snicker*) but yours doesn't.
so let football be a major. call it a science. whatever. it doesn't need to be an easy major either. to graduate college even the dancers and actors need to take general eds. footballers would take those classes and more. make them take physics. make them take a management class devoted to coaching. make them take a sports writing class. make them take a bunch of stats classes.
anyway, no joke. i know i wouldn't survive that major.
yo, locksthenes! i tagged you. check out my site for instructions.
Post a Comment