Recent Comments

They have other options. This isn't a monopoly. Arena, CFL, European team or just wait until they are old enough for NFL draft.

Alright, you've done it twice now this week. Don't copy and paste the entire article from somewhere else, even if it's free like from Hokiesports.

http://www.thekeyplay.com/community-guidelines

Don't copy and paste entire articles into posts and comments. Limit it to the most relevant paragraph(s). Include a link to the original source so people can read the entire article. Wrap pasted text inside blockquote tags using the quote button.

But I still hold to my point that the "these kids need to be paid" argument rings hollow when you consider the vast monetary dollar value of what they already get for free through the scholarships.

It doesn't ring hollow to me because they aren't compensated at a fair market value.

Nobody is forced to participate

That's terrible logic. The same could be said of any monopolistic business practice.

Good lord, these videos have got to stop before I have to buy a whole new collection of pants.

I think that's the most likely scenario, and if so, it has been handled very well. But there are two other scenarios:

1. Jackson really was that good that it made it difficult. That would be awesome if that was the case, that we have at least two good QB's in the system currently.

2. The scuttlebutt on Evans is that he lacks a little bit of the necessary arm strength and throws it to the other team too much. We pretty much know what Motley can do well and not so well. Jackson is 18 years old and played HS football against marginal competition on Michigan. In others words, all were flawed and Fuente left it open so someone could take it but in the end, just had to pick someone.

That latter scenario probably happens a lot more than we think. Coaches talk up a position battle an the eventual winner, but are concerned about the talent at the position going into the first game.

I don't think it's that straight forward... What if a student athlete's medical debt resulting from their sport is greater than the student loan debt of their peers? Not only that, but what about all of the potential earnings they are missing out on?

Being a student athlete isn't like spending 20 hours a week being a cashier in exchange for free tuition. There's lots of pros and cons that may or may not balance out. Outside of practice, there's off season training, studying the playbook and film room. There's rehab and recovery. For football, there's injury risk that can affect you for your entire life. You also don't have the ability to profit off your name (aka no running a camp, giving lessons, or doing freelance working in the summers, which I did a lot of growing up). Finally, there's socio-economic issues that contribute to players not being able to take advantage of their degree. There's also perks like being a local celebrity, access to tutors, and (of course) free tuition.
TL;DR - you can argue that 'unpaid' is technically inaccurate, as they are receiving a form of compensation, but it's tough to identify (1) are student athletes being fairly compensated and (2) is the NCAA acting 'unethically'.

Although I expect to be very one sided, I'm looking forward to the documentary.

Oh, I agree there are definitely some massive holes in the process like school sponsored health care that will at the very least cover all medical costs associated with injuries which occurred as a result of being on the team.

But I still hold to my point that the "these kids need to be paid" argument rings hollow when you consider the vast monetary dollar value of what they already get for free through the scholarships.

It's like entering a lottery that you don't have to pay for, but you do have to play for, in an apprenticeship sort of way.

You get a free scholarship and stipend, training, the possibility of playing in a national spotlight, and the possibility of an NFL job.

Nobody is forced to participate.

Pages