<p>The glory and scandal of big-time college football, there is a lot of both in a sport that generates millions of dollars in fans and huge amounts of excitement and controversy.</p>
<p>That line also serves as the subtitle of a new book that explores numerous case studies and investigations. It's titled: The System, co-authored by Jeff Benedict and, joining us now, Armen Keteyian, correspondent for CBS News and for 60 Minutes Sports on Showtime.</p>
<p>Last time I looked nobody was forced to play college football. If you choose to play choose wisely. Have heard the same about many grad school profs.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t mind seeing college football separated from academics. That is, football players would no longer be students. They would be paid, they could be traded, they wouldn’t have to leave after 4 (5?) years, and of course they wouldn’t have any classes to attend.</p>
<p>Seems to me like it would be more honest, at least.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t mind seeing college football separated from academics. That is, football players would no longer be students. They would be paid, they could be traded, they wouldn’t have to leave after 4 (5?) years, and of course they wouldn’t have any classes to attend.</p>
<p>Why deny them a college education? 90%+ will never go pro. What good would it do to just pay them for 4 years and then release them w/o any education? Keeping them forever wouldn’t work. </p>
<p>And, why deny them an education while the other sports’ athletes are getting an education??</p>
<p>m2ck, it does appear from a quick Google search that you can get Pell on top of athletic scholarships. All the D1 athletes I know are wayyyyyyy out of Pell range so I can’t confirm.</p>
<p>At least my prof can pay me so I can put gas in my tank.</p>
<p>Well, a low income student on a full ride athletic scholarship would have Pell to cover gas expenses. Those who are “beyond Pell” should have family who can help cover some of what would have been their EFC.</p>
<p>Can athletes take out student loans towards the gap between their full ride and COA? If so, then that would be another source of money.</p>
<p>I watched this story when it first aired. What shocked me is that only 22 of the top 120 college football programs make money or break even. Everyone in the system knows that something is not right but they continue to try to keep up with the Joneses. To me it sounds like there is a college football version of the housing crisis in the making.</p>
<p>You should be equally or more concerned with ALL of the other money-losing sports. I don’t think ANY of the women’s sports make ANY money at all at any school. </p>
<p>The successful football teams are FUNDING all the other super-money-losing sports. The successful football teams are funding EVERYONE else’s scholarships, uniforms, coaches, facilities, travel, etc. </p>
<p>So, before everyone piles on football first ask yourself if you want to get rid of all the money-losing women’s teams. For some reason, the fact that the women’s teams are all money pits doesn’t seem to bother people very much…hmmmm.</p>
<p>I love college football. I never said I wanted to get rid of it. I have no idea where you got that from my post.</p>
<p>I just thought it was interesting that 80% of the top 120 programs lose money or break even. The public perception is that the top football programs are making money for their schools and funding other sports. That is not true. </p>
<p>Of course the student/athletes don’t get a penny of that money, and they’re fined if they try to even use their own likeness and name in any entrepreneurial way. </p>
<p>It’s a scam and the victims are the student athletes, especially that 90% that don’t make it to the pros and are chewed up and spat out by this system.</p>
<p>One of the benefits of college football is that it gives a lot of little boys who may not be very bright and not have families that value education a chance at living a dream of being a college athlete playing on TV. If someone reminds them that they have to have good grades to get into college, the otherwise dumb kids might be a little less dumb and pay a little more attention in school.</p>
<p>*Of course the student/athletes don’t get a penny of that money, and they’re fined if they try to even use their own likeness and name in any entrepreneurial way. *</p>
<p>I would consider getting a full ride for college as getting more than “a penny”. And, some even get grad school paid for. </p>
<p>I don’t think the students are fined. Which students have been fined? The schools get fined sometimes.</p>
<p>“I love college football. I never said that I wanted to get rid of it.”</p>
<p>But if college football became an entity where the players were well-paid w/o football scholarships, then THE OTHER funded (women’s) sports would not get funded…and wouldn’t even exist because Title IX would fall apart. </p>
<p>Right now, schools that have 70+ scholarship males on football teams have to have 70+ women’s scholarships, too. If you pay those males, those male scholarships go away, and then the women’s go bye bye, too.</p>
<p>“It’s a scam and the victims are the student athletes, especially that 90% that don’t make it to the pros and are chewed up and spat out by this system.”</p>
<p>Nonsense. It’s more of a chance than many(most) of the kids will ever have in life. Choose wisely.
I suggest watching “The Journey” on the Big Ten Network. Many of the kids dismissed on face value due to race and background will greatly surprise you.</p>
<p>The schools spend their own money to support them. Without scholies, big-time coaches, air travel etc the costs are not that high. Maybe $25K for the average sport. Football would still cost more. maybe $200K.</p>
<p>I don’t think I can accept these arguments, which are of the slippery-slope type. Why couldn’t women’s sports be funded by the for-profit, non-student football programs?</p>
<p>And what of the many colleges without significant football programs? Is the existence of these (male) programs truly necessary to have women’s sports at colleges?</p>