<p>Division I basketball and football games can bring in millions upon millions of dollars through endorsements and TV contracts. While it may not be "fair" to the hardworking student who actually deserved to be there because of his/her academic performance, money gained from the student athletes is more important to the university as a whole than absolute fairness/equality.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree completely...show me where this statement is true. I am willing to bet that a large percentage of schools operate in the red with their athletic departments.</p>
<p>Sympathy hit the nail on the head here:</p>
<p>
[quote]
"It takes hours of reading to become an intellectual. Most individuals (if determined) could become an intellectual.
It takes a predetermined gift to be an athletic. Therefore, everyone cannot be an athletic."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>the two major Division 1 college sports, basketball and football, are occupied for the most part, by extremely talented athletes who worked hard, but who also have been given special physical gifts (actually, these physical gifts have a lot to do with mental capacity as well) that have been developed to a special level.</p>
<p>did you know that, according to USAToday, hitting a baseball at the highest level in MLB (average speed in the 80's MPH), takes a genius level of brain activity? All of your .300 avg. or above MLB hitters are actually geniuses. Don't believe me, check out USAToday's top 10 hardest things to do in sports. They had scientists confirm it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree completely...show me where this statement is true. I am willing to bet that a large percentage of schools operate in the red with their athletic departments.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I typed College Football Revenue in google and got these:
<a href="http://www.collegecharlie.com/cfb.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.collegecharlie.com/cfb.html</a> (scroll down)
<a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/2003/preview/mainbar/%5B/url%5D">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/2003/preview/mainbar/</a>
<a href="http://library.findlaw.com/2004/Feb/23/133296.html%5B/url%5D">http://library.findlaw.com/2004/Feb/23/133296.html</a></p>
<p>The amount of money some schools (Notre Dame is ridiculous) make off a single football game is outstanding.</p>
<p>schell, you have stated money made by one sport at one school....the statement I disagree with says "athletes in college bring in the bucks"....show me where athletes, other than football/basketball players, bring in the bucks.</p>
<p>I didn't make the "bring in the bucks" statement, but either way, I doubt that schools would put themselves at a major loss for athletics. It's not something easily researched, but you just have to take into account all the sponserships, television deals, and whatever else even lesser sports such as lacrosse get.</p>
<p>I didn't just say one sport at one school. Look at the websites I linked. It includes hundreds of teams throughout the NCAA. The top teams are making in excess of 20 million in profit a year off football alone.</p>
<p>Do some colleges lose money through athletics? Possibly, but wouldn't you agree that athletics bring something to a university that's worth the loss of money in these cases?</p>
<p>it's pretty easy to research if you use the following site correctly...you can find the revenues and expenses of most (if not all) colleges who have athletic teams:</p>
<p><a href="http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/%5B/url%5D">http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/</a></p>
<p>Without football and basketball, colleges operate at a loss in athletics...some (like Temple) are breaking even, even after football and basketball (which, for the bottom feeders of the NCAA, a big chunk of revenue can be attributed to their conference affiliation's profit sharing) are taken into account.</p>
<p>thus, the only athletes who truly "bring in the bucks" are football and basketball players, and more specifically--football and basketball players at BIG name athletic schools (e.g. USC, UCLA, Texas, and Notre Dame).</p>
<p>here's an example of my point:</p>
<p>The University of Texas vs. Baylor University.</p>
<p>both participate in the same athletic conference, the Big XII, and both are in the same state....</p>
<p>UT-A:</p>
<p>Reporting Year : 9/1/2004-8/31/2005</p>
<p>Football Revenue: $53,204,171
Football Expenses: $14,489,472 </p>
<p>Baylor:</p>
<p>Reporting Year : 6/1/2004-5/31/2005
Football Revenue: $6,500,150
Football Expenses: $7,640,954 </p>
<p>Wow, I guess Texas needs to help out more than they are, eh?</p>
<p>This year's national championship should help Baylor out a little.</p>
<p>It's not really unfair.</p>
<p>I'm a recruited athelete with a 4.5 and other stats that are "up there"...</p>
<p>Not all athletes make much money at all. Major League Lacrosse players get paid 6,000 a year. That's Six thousand. They all have full time jobs, and fly to the games on the weekends.</p>
<p>Athletes also deserve scholarship money because of how much time they put out. A varsity lacrosse player will lift weights 2 hours a day in the offseason, then add 3-4 hour practices to that during the season.</p>
<p>That's A LOT of time. Add the rigors of study at a prestigous university, and they have a hard life.</p>
<p>I was going to settle for a DIII school, but then I realized I would be bored out of my mind there if I got injured... So now I'm stepping up my training a lot, and I think I can probably make the cut for D1. All that I hope to gain from it is maybe just an extra push into the acceptance pile.</p>
<p>Stop complaining...
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=123952%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=123952</a></p>
<p>College athletes, especially those on scholarship, are owned by their coaches. They have virtually no control over their time. Many are told what courses to take, when to study, where to eat, and where to room. They work out all year round, are frequently, and painfully injured, and do not get the time they need to study. For the very few who get to make a career out of their athletic skill it's not a bad trade-off, but for the others they only get joy out of it.</p>
<p>I spent many years when I was in the Federal Government reviewing college athletics programs and I'll tell you that given the demands on college athletes it's a wonder any of them ever graduate. It's the toughest way to get through college.</p>
<p>Fair.</p>
<p>Come on now. The amount of potential recruited athletes is really minute.</p>
<p>Simple:</p>
<p>THEY EARN Colleges MONEY! $$$$$! Yes sports games! How much has Vince Young earned for UT?!? ANd hes probably getting $0 from UT besides free tuition/board/otherjunk.</p>
<p>damitssam, </p>
<p>I would argue that there are too many other factors involved to make a blanket statement about the value of Vince Young to Texas, Reggie Bush to USC, etc. There is sort of a "chicken/egg, egg/chicken" dynamic occuring in these situations to be able to conclude 100% that athletes provide for the school more than the school provides for them. </p>
<p>The fairness of athletic scholarships is a tough call...and each situation is unique.</p>
<p>As long as a school admits that they're taking athletes with less than par academic standards, that's fine by me. Some Universities wants good athletic teams. They bring attention to the university, add a facet to student life, and serve as a (major) source of revenue. It's their perogative to admit who they want. However, I do have a problem with schools that let athletes through the backdoor and don't admit it. C'mon Ivies, when your star running back has an 1100 (old) SAT, you can't deny he was slipped in via football. If they were open about it, that would be fine.</p>
<p>Have you guys ever considered that if those athletes didn't dedicate so much of their time to their respective sports, they would do remarkably better in academics, maybe even better than you? I think a lot of you are biased because you yourselves aren't particularly good at sport, and don't respect what it takes to be successful in it....</p>
<p>Why isn't it fair, the last time I checked they gave people academic scholarships too.</p>
<p>Of course its fair. Almost the same as merit scholarships. </p>
<p>My cousin was recruited to play at Duke a couple years back. That kid has been playing sports his entire life, since he was a little kid. He has dedicated almost his whole life to the sport. There should be some reward for that talent. Sure he may not be a genius, but that is what sets him apart from everyone else. He completely deserved his admission. </p>
<p>Before I was injured I was in contact with several coaches to play college level, at a few Div I's and Div III's. I have dedicated 14 years of my life to soccer. I've played 3 seasons a year since I was 11 years old. That's serious committment. Why should athletes not have a shot at admissions to top schools, especially if we have the grades. Its a reward for the dedication and committment, sports, especially at a high level, is a serious extra curricular.</p>
<p>"Running forms the body. Weightlifting produces muscles.
Reading creates thought. Natural aptitude causes intellectuals.</p>
<p>Therefore, athletes are formed, intellectuals are born"</p>
<p>If that is what you think, then you are really naive, and obviously not an intellectual yourself. I am a Varsity cross country runner with a 4.5 GPA, and not even close to receiving an athletic scholarship. I will get into my colleges for my grades. I can run 3 miles, each slightly above 5 minutes. Now are you honestly telling me if I worked harder I could run a 3:30 mile? Gee that would make me a top worldclass athlete running in the Olympics. The fact is the best athletes and intellectuals require natural talent.</p>
<p>Do athletes deserve athletic scholarships? They make money for the colleges, much more than the students do. Athletes certainly contribute to the diversity of the student body. I believe that speaks for itself.</p>
<p>If it is the goal of the university to create a well-rounded freshman CLASS, then yes, it is fair to give athletic scholarships because they contribute to part of the class. </p>
<p>They also possess a (highly valued) talent that most of the other applicants don't possess, and this talent could translate to instant returns on investment for the college.</p>