TheLastIndependent
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2011
- Messages
- 1,545
- Reaction score
- 466
- Location
- North Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
That's just not enough.
So around $40k at minimum is just not enough? By this thought, I should've stopped doing well in school and just practiced sports my whole life. Could make a living in college alone
They most certainly are not professional athletes. If they were they would be employees.I think they're part student but not fully and part professional athlete but not fully. With regular students, education comes first. With NCAA student athletes playing ball and winning games comes first.
If students that play games for amusement were couches they would make millions also. They aren't employees they are consumers. The coach is an employee.They answer to a coach who is often a millionaire and sometimes a multi-millionaire.
They get plenty. Free education and possibility to be selected for the pros. I am okay with them getting the way more than generous perks they get already. Giving them money would turn colleges into a professional game playing league. The millions that they make on amusement games ifs reinvested into the school. The players get. plenty of compensation. A free degree.The schools fill up stadiums and arena grossing millions per game. The schools have seven figure athletic shoe endorsements. The school gets TV ad revenue and sells team apparel. I just think its only fair for the students to get something and I'm okay with squirrelling all away in a Roth IRA or something similar.
That's just not enough.
Considering the going rate in many football leagues is much more than that, no it isn't.
I personally think it's way too much. They get free education, free housing and they get to play games.Considering the going rate in many football leagues is much more than that, no it isn't.
Considering how few athletes become professional athletes... they're still there for college. They're given benefits to do things other than college. How that isn't enough you'll have to explain.
I personally think it's way too much. They get free education, free housing and they get to play games.
I personally think it's way too much. They get free education, free housing and they get to play games.
Why shouldn't the schools make money off of the students? It's a business.The school is making so much more money off of them
I don't think it's one bit ridiculous. The money is reinvested into the school.school.it's ridiculous.
They don't have to choose that hobby. They can go for photography, or engineering, veterinary medicine.The fact that their medical bills related to their time playing the game isn't paid for by the schools is ridiculous.
The school is making so much more money off of them it's ridiculous. The fact that their medical bills related to their time playing the game isn't paid for by the schools is ridiculous.
Because they are putting their body on the line. They are risking life long bodily harm and the schools are benefiting greatly. The least they could do is pay for their medical bills. It's that simple.
Why shouldn't the schools make money off of the students? It's a business.
I don't think it's one bit ridiculous. The money is reinvested into the school.school.
They don't have to choose that hobby. They can go for photography, or engineering, veterinary medicine.
If I get hurt talking photos for photography class the college doesn't pay my bills.
I think it's great the school makes millions they can offer better education to students who pursue real jobs.
They choose to do it though. The school is not forcing them to play the sport. It would be nice if the school did, however it would be wrong to legislate it as a necessity. It would also likely translate to higher costs for other students or perhaps less full athletic scholarships.
If I get hurt talking photos for photography class the college doesn't pay my bills.
Because they are putting their body on the line. They are risking life long bodily harm and the schools are benefiting greatly. The least they could do is pay for their medical bills. It's that simple.
They are putting their body on the line to play a game under their own accord. The school is in no way responsible to pay for whatever injury results from their choice
Well they don't have to play ball. Why should they get payed for being students? If they want to earn money theycan drop playing games or take out a loan, or get a job.
There is no reason to pay them. They are students. No other student is payed for their labor.
For a hobby. They don't have to play.Because they are putting their body on the line.
They don't have to play. If it isn't fair they can quit.They are risking life long bodily harm and the schools are benefiting greatly.
The least they could do is not offer scholarships and make them pay tuition and get student loans.The least they could do is pay for their medical bills. It's that simple.
A bit of a silly comparison, don't you think? Your college classes won't knowingly place you in bodily harm.
They aren't employees. And if they were they get education completely free. While others who contribute far more than playing games must pay ludacrisly high tuition. This is going to be an excuse to increase that burden.
They are putting their body on the line to play a game under their own accord. The school is in no way responsible to pay for whatever injury results from their choice
They are putting their body on the line to play a game under their own accord. The school is in no way responsible to pay for whatever injury results from their choice
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?