The mission of college sports was not always to make money.
Trust the market
- Thread starter Marvin the Martian
- Start date
I remember in 2011 Unc Charlotte lost the national championship game in soccer to chapel hill. The coach of Uncc made $60k. Just crazy to think about
Maybe at one point, but that ship sailed a long time ago. The mission of universities are still in tact, they have just evolved in my opinion. I view paying athletes closer to their market value a good thing and step forward for universities. Making arbitrary laws that inhibited players being paid their market rate was wrong.
To me it crosses from student athlete to professional employee. That’s a different animal having little to do with the school. I’m not a fan. Why bother with the pretense of school. Let’s just hire the best we can and see who wins. Don’t even enroll in school. Just be an employee
The NCAA and schools have raised money hand over fist. Knight complained long ago about later night games in Minnesota and what time they get home, what do you think happens when IU plays at Washington at 10 our time? At no point has the NCAA or the conferences or the universities considered what is best for student athletes. If they did we wouldn't have cross country conferences. I am not sure we would have artificial turf. We wouldn't have been using NIL in video games (the case that set this off) They (NCAA/conferences/universities) have been treating them as employees, as pros. As moneymakers for older guys. What is wrong with asking how to make this better for the kids?
As to the markets, the thread is addressed as it is as I have often been told on this board that CEOs deserve golden parachutes. That part of the thread is geared for whomever they are.
I have been annoyed as anyone at NIL, but it just hit me I shouldn't be mad these players are getting some of what they are being exploited for. Good for them. Again, I fully expect contracts to come out of this which will reduce movement. That will solve the problem most have complained about.
If IU keeps paying coaches $10 million to leave, why not let the actual workers get some of the rewards of their work?
How much should the market for 8 year old girls be?
Nope. Not even libertarian economists think that:
Market Failures, Public Goods, and Externalities - Econlib
Definitions and Basics Definition: Market failure, from Investopedia.com: Market failure is the economic situation defined by an inefficient distribution of goods and services in the free market. Furthermore, the individual incentives for rational behavior do not lead to rational outcomes for...
www.econlib.org
Not sure what you’re getting at?
How do you think all of the public goods are provided?Nope. Not even libertarian economists think that:
Market Failures, Public Goods, and Externalities - Econlib
Definitions and Basics Definition: Market failure, from Investopedia.com: Market failure is the economic situation defined by an inefficient distribution of goods and services in the free market. Furthermore, the individual incentives for rational behavior do not lead to rational outcomes for...www.econlib.org
Should markets and the price mechanism determine the distribution of children to various people?
Nothing but a bunch of old cranks on this thread.
What Jay Bilas Doesn't Understand About Sports Leagues and Markets | Czabe.com
Let me begin by saying that Jay Bilas is one of the best college basketball analysts on television. He understand the game deeply, and has a communicator’s touch when it comes to relaying that understanding to the audience. Jay Bilas is also smarter than me, on the whole. He attended Duke, and...
czabe.com
Communist Sports Leagues Are Better
More so than any other developed nation, the United States has staked its fortunes to free markets. Western European countries, however, employ economic philosophies that are patently bent to be more socialistic, with higher taxes, universal health care and stronger labor laws. The same ethos...
www.forbes.com
The Economics of Sports Leagues
This article explains why general economic principles are not accurate when it comes to predicting the behavior of teams participating in a sports league. It also explains the peculiar economic rules which apply to sports leagues.
College basketball is about to get better again. The G League Ignite is shutting down. That will push much better players into college ball. Don’t give up hope.
Trust the market.
That's how we were able to get our latest Burger Boy.
If the Ignite is still around, we don't get Tucker.
That's a good summary. People only stay dumb for so long and then they figure out what's going on and want their share of the pie.
That Czabe guy is an idiot.What Jay Bilas Doesn't Understand About Sports Leagues and Markets | Czabe.com
Let me begin by saying that Jay Bilas is one of the best college basketball analysts on television. He understand the game deeply, and has a communicator’s touch when it comes to relaying that understanding to the audience. Jay Bilas is also smarter than me, on the whole. He attended Duke, and...czabe.com
Communist Sports Leagues Are Better
More so than any other developed nation, the United States has staked its fortunes to free markets. Western European countries, however, employ economic philosophies that are patently bent to be more socialistic, with higher taxes, universal health care and stronger labor laws. The same ethos...
The Economics of Sports Leagues
This article explains why general economic principles are not accurate when it comes to predicting the behavior of teams participating in a sports league. It also explains the peculiar economic rules which apply to sports leagues.managementstudyguide.com
What Jay Bilas Doesn't Understand About Sports Leagues and Markets | Czabe.com
Let me begin by saying that Jay Bilas is one of the best college basketball analysts on television. He understand the game deeply, and has a communicator’s touch when it comes to relaying that understanding to the audience. Jay Bilas is also smarter than me, on the whole. He attended Duke, and...czabe.com
Communist Sports Leagues Are Better
More so than any other developed nation, the United States has staked its fortunes to free markets. Western European countries, however, employ economic philosophies that are patently bent to be more socialistic, with higher taxes, universal health care and stronger labor laws. The same ethos...
The Economics of Sports Leagues
This article explains why general economic principles are not accurate when it comes to predicting the behavior of teams participating in a sports league. It also explains the peculiar economic rules which apply to sports leagues.
To the Bilas article, these athletes are not really students. I posted above Knight complained about the student part being shortchanged 40 years ago, and it has gotten worse. We have been sacrificing the "student" to make more money since Magic played Bird.
Below is a great story about a woman who scored as many points in college as Clark. But no one heard of her, she plays NAIA. She had NCAA schools reach out to her in high school, but when they discovered her major was going to be some combosof pharmacy/chemistry/biology they backed off. No one could do that level of course work and play basketball. So she went NAIA. So explain to me the student part?
Meet Grace Beyer, the small-school scoring phenom
Iowa star Caitlin Clark might never catch her.
spectrumnews1.com
A buddy had a nice play softball at OK State. He told me one day several players missed practice, there was a nursing event that nursing majors had to attend. The next day the coach made it clear they were there on athletic scholarships and practice took priority over all else. Having worked with a lot of work-study kids, I have never heard them told that.
The best answer was always to have MLB minor leagues. Without them, we are attracting athletes whose real major is athletics. We do it so old guys, and no bookies, can get rich.
OK (Sooners) built a 50 million dollar stadium….for softball.To the Bilas article, these athletes are not really students. I posted above Knight complained about the student part being shortchanged 40 years ago, and it has gotten worse. We have been sacrificing the "student" to make more money since Magic played Bird.
Below is a great story about a woman who scored as many points in college as Clark. But no one heard of her, she plays NAIA. She had NCAA schools reach out to her in high school, but when they discovered her major was going to be some combosof pharmacy/chemistry/biology they backed off. No one could do that level of course work and play basketball. So she went NAIA. So explain to me the student part?
Meet Grace Beyer, the small-school scoring phenom
Iowa star Caitlin Clark might never catch her.
A buddy had a nice play softball at OK State. He told me one day several players missed practice, there was a nursing event that nursing majors had to attend. The next day the coach made it clear they were there on athletic scholarships and practice took priority over all else. Having worked with a lot of work-study kids, I have never heard them told that.
The best answer was always to have MLB minor leagues. Without them, we are attracting athletes whose real major is athletics. We do it so old guys, and no bookies, can get rich.
Yep, they are elite. They don't get to be elite because kids need to miss practice or a game because of academics.
Hm. Not sure about that. When a wealthy fan/donor funds a coach’s buyout or pumps big bucks into NIL, do you really think that donor intends to make money with that donation?
He might be. But he's right about the relevant issue here: sports leagues are not free markets.
I disagree with the fundamental premise behind this statement that college athletes need to be "elite" in order to make college sports a viable product that generates TV viewership or attendance.
I think the majority of people watch and follow college sports for the names on the front of the jersey, not the back. They want to cheer for a team, for a school, for a tribe, for an alma mater, for nostalgia, and for bragging rights over those other fans. As long as the sport is fun to watch, the relative level of athleticism and production just needs to meet a minimal level to continue to tune in and be worthwhile.
For example, would you really prefer to watch IU if we had a squad of all high-flying dunkers who could do amazing flips while dunking but had a meh record? Or would you prefer to watch a team of student athletes like the mid-70s squads playing against other such competitive teams of student athletes? Or a team of Damon Bailey's, Steve Alfords, AJ Guytons, Matt Novers, AJ Moyes who played as a team? Do you find yourself going out of your way to watch the star players any given year over and above the Hoosiers? Do you think the movie Hoosiers would be as exciting and emotionally impactful if it involved a group of 5 kids who just decided to transfer in to Milan, not attend school, but try to win a basketball championship?
At this point, I think I'd prefer watching and following high school athletics. Those kids belong to a school, are part of that school, play hard, etc. But maybe I'm the outlier or just a grumpy old man.
You keep pointing out the way the current system is. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing what it should be if it is associated with a university, higher education, and wants to be non-profit.To the Bilas article, these athletes are not really students. I posted above Knight complained about the student part being shortchanged 40 years ago, and it has gotten worse. We have been sacrificing the "student" to make more money since Magic played Bird.
Below is a great story about a woman who scored as many points in college as Clark. But no one heard of her, she plays NAIA. She had NCAA schools reach out to her in high school, but when they discovered her major was going to be some combosof pharmacy/chemistry/biology they backed off. No one could do that level of course work and play basketball. So she went NAIA. So explain to me the student part?
Meet Grace Beyer, the small-school scoring phenom
Iowa star Caitlin Clark might never catch her.
A buddy had a nice play softball at OK State. He told me one day several players missed practice, there was a nursing event that nursing majors had to attend. The next day the coach made it clear they were there on athletic scholarships and practice took priority over all else. Having worked with a lot of work-study kids, I have never heard them told that.
The best answer was always to have MLB minor leagues. Without them, we are attracting athletes whose real major is athletics. We do it so old guys, and no bookies, can get rich.
I've agreed with you before about turning this stuff into a minor league, cutting university ties, and returning college athletics to what it was supposed to be.
I don't think we are that far off in a way. I have attended many more women's games and baseball games than football or men's basketball games this century. It fits closer to what I prefer. And I love the idea of club sports taking over all
But the reality is the Big 10 just stole from the Pac. The B10 and SEC are in discussions to kick out the NCAA and takeover football entirely. Greed has won, I cannot stop it. You cannot.
I cannot change the facts as they exist. Come Jan 20 next year, Biden or Trump will be sworn in. I cannot change one of those from happening, all I can change is how I react to such crisis. This is similar. If we are going to force all IU teams to have Wednesday night games in LA to make money, whatever kids can get money from it should. The NCAA, the conferences, the schools use and abuse this student athlete thing. Totally abuse it. The kids deserve something if the suits are getting rich. And the suits are getting rich.
With the rising costs of college, is it really true that they aren't getting "something?" Those Duke athletes, for example, are getting something valued at something approaching $100k a year. In light of that, I wouldn't call it abuse at all.
You spoke in a thread about IU's value being degraded. You don't think people degrade degrees from athletes? How much weight do you think a sports marketing degree for an athlete carries?
I hope the athletes get a percentage, a huge percentage, of tv rights. I am tired of the leeches winning. We pay to see the players, not the head of the NCAA, the head of the B10, not Dolson, not Woodson. Those people (standing for all in similar positions) have shown incredible ability to grab money hand over fist. Do you think anyone would take those jobs if offered a free Masters?
Re the athletes getting a percentage, I'm Ok with that. I just don't want it doled out on the "free market" approach, per player.
As for your last question, I'd take that job for a free four years of grad school. Sign me up. I'll do my best to copy Hurley's offense and defense.
They get to see a new coach or player brought in/retained, which would mean, in their eyes, they get a return on their investment.
Donors want their money to go to winning programs.
True that the donors dollar isn't monetary, but going into the deal, the donor knows monetary return isn't an option, so their return would be in a different way.
They have money that we could only imagine, more times then not.
If I had Andy Mohr money I'd pay the volleyball team 10K each to wash cars outside in shorts and tee shirts.
Speaking of trusting the market I see Caitlin Clark’s starting salary is $76k. Yikes. I know she makes endorsement bank from college but she could just get a job that pays that.
The WNBA players make far more overseas. That is why Greiner wanted to go to Russia, they pay the best for women's basketball.
If Clark leads to a ratings bonanza the US pay may go up a little. I don't know how long the TV contract is for. The Fever have like 36 of their 40 games on national TV.
I thought I read a while back that players will play their season, and then once it's over, go overseas and play because of the money.
They have to be back by the time training camps start to be eligible for the season is what I remember.
Yep, that's how it works. Of course, this year is the Olympics which adds a lot of games. I imagine injury risks will go up.
That's because there's no free market in WNBA salaries. They're set by contract agreements with the players' union.
She'll be fine though. She's making a killing from State Farm alone. It's the lesser names like Grace Berger that have to decide if playing ball is worth it.
I saw right now the women get 10% of the gross. I saw several of the women in the league saying they realize they can't earn what the men do, they just want to get toward the same 50% the men have. If Clark impacts the TV contract, they might start getting closer. Even at 10% the WNBA has never made a profit.
Similar threads
