I can see where they need money, but there’s gonna be an uproar for sure. Especially if you don’t go to that school or support it. Why should people in Happy
Valley have to pay for Pitt athletes, for example?
It’s fucking ridiculous. Most college athletes that play basketball or football for Division I and II conference schools are already getting full ride scholarships and other amenities not available to typical students, and intercollege athletics are prestige programs that almost unavoidably money for the schools. These programs essentially serve as feeder leagues into professional sports leagues that they don’t pay for.
Stranger
I was at the University of Florida over 25 years ago, and their athletic department is financially separate from the rest of the university. They generate a lot of revenue (about $200 million in 2024) and they use that to cover expenses. They can afford to pay their athletes $20 million, it doesn’t need any from the rest of the university. That applies to most top tier athletic universities.
NO!!!
Universities need to use the ton of money they are making from TV deals for that type of thing.
I was at UF around the same time, and this was indeed the case. Then when I went to the U. of Illinois for my professional degree, there was some bullshit fee I had to pay for the athletic department. I think it was $35 or so per semester.
Absolutely not. If they want to pay college athletes, the money should come from the sales of game tickets and merchandise (or, I guess, donations from donors who want their money to go to athletics and have earmarked it for that purpose). Otherwise, it’s siphoning off funds that were intended to support the university’s core mission (academics) and redirecting them to something unrelated to that mission.
US college sport is a mystery to me, as a Brit.
When I was at university in the UK (back in the stone age, admittedly), sport was a strictly amateur thing. There was a sort of tribal rivaly and pride, I guess, but not really any money involved.
Maybe someone can explain to me why this is such a big ticket for US universities?
Because of television. I don’t know how it is in the UK, but in the US televised college sports is incredibly popular, especially for the top big name schools. Television rights are very expensive and the addition of huge sums of money to the college sports experience corrupts it as it does everywhere else.
That’s half of it. The other half is that the NBA (basketball) and especially the NFL (American football) don’t have a robust minor league system the way that MLB (baseball) and the NHL (ice hockey) have. Which means that the best prospects, instead of being drafted out of high school to develop in the minor leagues, instead play those years on a college team. If we could somehow get the NFL and NBA to contribute for the benefit they are getting (having universities develop their players at no cost to them), then this wouldn’t be an issue.
Not a big fan of college (or any) sports in any event, but I strongly oppose tax dollars going to pay athletes. If I were a student/parent paying tuition, I would oppose my tuition dollars going to the same. With the exception - I suppose - of some atletic scholarships.
Seems like a no-brainer to support athlete pay entirely through ticket sales/TV/advertising revenue. Or each athlete supplementing through their own likeness, etc. If you are a podunk school w/o a big TV deal, you just can’t afford to pay your athletes as much. Too bad.
Universities already use student funds and (for public universities) taxes to support their athletics programs. Why do they do this? Because without those sources of funding, the athletic programs wouldn’t be solvent, and would collapse. And why would that be a problem? Because the athletic programs are so important, because they bring in so much money to the university.
You’d think that the people in charge of universities, of all places, would have a modicum of critical thinking skills.
Canadian college athletes are not paid anything, but no one is making money off their televised games. Canadians enjoy playing hockey and two-pitch or whatever, but few want to watch amateur games unless a family member is involved. The “Friday Night Lights” ideal is very much an American thing, and small towns and colleges here do not have ginormous stadia. My college won several national football titles, their stadium might seat three thousand people. At best, an excellent college athlete might be a local celebrity with a shot at the big leagues.
I think TV is most or all of it. The TV revenue is staggering.
Power Five conferences generated over $3.55 billion in revenue during the 2023 fiscal year
That cbssports article talks about total revenue, but let’s be real, the vast majority of it is from TV deals. A quick google shows the current/new Big Ten TV deal is for a billion dollars per year!
It is fucking ridiculous because we set up a system where “student” athletes are being exploited with very little in compensation. These athletes are only supposed to spend a maximum of 20 hours per week involved in sports activities, but that’s a joke, and if they get injured and can’t play they might lose their scholarships. At least for some sports, like football, basketball, and baseball, they help their school generate a lot of revenue and receive no compensation.
In theory you can make use of some of those facilities to exercise. When I was an undergraduate, I felt as though I was being ripped off when it came to the costs of books. The facilities fee wasn’t even a blip on my radar.
In addition to the lucrative TV contracts, as already mentioned, athletic programs are used by the universities as a way to drive engagement with, and donations from, their alumni.
Student athletes can make quite a bit of money. Millions if they are high profile enough. It’s particularly interesting for women’s basketball, where top players can make far more money in college than they can in the pros.
Most schools have gyms, swimming pools, tennis courts, intramural sports. Our charge was called a student activity fee. Paid for maintenance of above facilities, referees, life guards etc… Sports for us normies.
To put in in UK terms, or something close.
In the UK, football is the #1 sport. You’ve got football leagues all the way up and down the country in a comprehensive promotion and relegation scheme. So in theory, a team in the Isthmian League could be promoted all the way to the Premier League, and conversely someone a Premier League team could theoretically land all the way down in the Isthmian League.
In US sports, only baseball and hockey have anything remotely similar, with a network of minor leagues. But the teams are typically affiliated, and there’s no promotion or relegation of entire teams, just players.
The other two big sports- American football and basketball don’t have minor leagues- the college teams play that role for largely historical reasons.
Combine that second-tier status with the fact that there are much more active and strong rivalries between schools in the same state (like say… Auburn/Alabama or Michigan/Michigan State) or between states (Texas/OU or Minnesota/Wisconsin) complete with trophies, friendly wagers between governors, etc… and you end up with a very popular spectacle.
Also, the NCAA basketball tournament in March is the closest thing to the FA Cup that the US has as well.
“Can” is the operative word there. The median “student”-athlete makes less than $100. For the big names, it is truly lucrative. For the vast majority? Here’s a couple dinners at Applebee’s.
Yeah, as FliktheBlue pointed out, American pro sports doesn’t have the promotion and relegation system that European sports does, and not really much in the way of sports academies for youth to develop the way Messi did. College sports is the de facto “junior pro league” for American pro sports. There isn’t a Draft of college players for European leagues, either.