Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)
Amateur status gets lost in all this posturing about paying players. I also think "exploitation" is a pretty strong word. Exploitation is paying the poor wages that keep them at poverty or worse, or child labor, or human trafficing. There is a lot of value received by athletes, whether it be revenue stream sports or cost line athletics. Athletic scholarships, travel, sports equipment, use of facilities, etc. all have a value. Sure, let the players become independent contractors, then have them pay for their equipment, rent the training facilities, pay tuition, living expenses, meals, travel, etc. I bet they'd be in the hole if they want to play that game.
What the players want is a paid free ride. Pay me like a professional athlete. Well, if you can earn your living as a professional athlete, go for it. Otherwise, you're just going to have to settle for the thousands of dollars in benefits you get from a university because you have some special athletic skill. Or better yet, eliminate the athletic scholarship and make them compete for tuition helps like the rest of us, who paid for every freaking service they ever got from The State University. Sorry, not crying no rivers for these poor athletes getting a free ride, which is so much more than just paying for their tuition.
Let them all be "walk-ons."
And the O'Bannon, et al test case, while he gets his, and the attorney gets theirs, who gets disenfranchised yet again? The inner city, the poor, the minorities. Do we really want to go back there so the fortunate few can get a paycheck for playing a sport while they are in college? The lawsuit and the concept would be a travesty to those whom athletic scholarships provide a hand up out of generational poverty.
Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
Last edited by traderumor; 03-20-2013 at 03:12 PM.