This is long but stay with me.

I saw a special, that spoke with a group of college students.

Talking with the group sparked a thought in me. I do not agree with colleges accepting students based on athletic performance. I also love college sports to put this into perspective. But why are the two connected. We have what is basically a recruiting agency for professional sports that gives away millions of dollars to athletes instead of our A students. It is great that we are giving knowledge to many that wouldn't normally get it, but if they make it they should spend there money on college and if they don't make them learn the hard way like the rest of us.


ps...sorry about the topic mixup but i decided to make two seperate posts instead of one long one.

Do you mean that if an athlete makes it into college, he should pay like an ordinary student?


I think the reason for athletic scholarships is because of the revenue generated from sports.

MT

it is but why do our colleges support taking money to let someone in...if the college bound athlete makes it to the pros he should pay like everyone else. Unless they are going to give sholarships to all doctors and architects. I know they don't bring in revenue but I don't think that colleges should support something that brings in millions and then "give" them a free path. My point is that there is no other pool to pick prospective employees out of like college sports in every career we are made to pay...so they should too.

However, if you get rid of athletic scholarships, there'll be less incentive for good athletes to go/stay in college and head to the pros instead.

The difference between athletes and practically every other field is that athletes don't need a college education to be a professional. However, I feel that we need as much incentives as possible for people to get a higher education. And I believe that scholarships helps keep athletes in college.

A doctor doesn't bring one thousandth the money Carson Palmer brings in. College sports help doctors and laywers by making the school richer. How much would LeBron James be worth to Duke or the Uof A

I'm probably off-base here, but I think this applies.

I think placing athletics over education is a problem throughout our entire education system.

Starting in high school and ending in college, athletes are given preferential treatment and socially promoted.

While I was in high school, the suckers that lived in my school district voted to gift the high school 28 million dollars. With this 28 million dollars, we were able to build an indoor track, indoor volley ball courts, indoor badminton courts, an indoor batting cage, and, my favorite, pole vault equipment.

Now this is all fine and good, except for the fact that we had three year old garbage computers, a poorly-equipped library, an undertrained faculty, an average class-size of nearly 30 students per class, and a severely underfunded, award-winning music program.

Why should these athletic programs receive so much funding when the primary role of a school is to educate.

So then we get to college. These fine, often state-funded, institutions, consistently sink mass quantities of taxpayer dollars into athletic programs.

Many colleges, whether it is against the rules or not, offer incentives to prospective high-school athletes to attend their university. They offer cars, accommodations, and I don't think it would be a far stretch to speculate that they help get their grades boosted when necessary.

Yes, these are bad things, but what about the good things these sports bring to the college? Well, there are plenty of good things. For one, there is publicity. If a school has a good athletic program, some people will be more likely to attend the university. There is also revenue to consider. Some colleges regularly sell-out 50,000+ stadiums for football games. This revenue assumedly offsets the cost of the athletic program, and possibly supplements other cost-intensive programs.

Mike

Yes it's good that athletes are getting an education that they wouldn't normally obtain. Although most of them get sociology, psychology, or economics degrees. Not that a degree in psych or sociology is a bad thing but they aren't using them to become acclaimed psychologists or hit the best seller's list with a book that rocks the sociology world.

So economics is probably the best choice for them. So they can wisely spend their riches. Do you really think that these guys are going to do there taxes by themselves.

Yes college athletic programs do bring in money, a lot of money.

It's a good thing that there are now regulations on college recruiting. And it "seems" to be working.

In the end I guess colleges are more like business than learning institutes. But that doesn't mean that I'm ok with it.

-signed
a soon to be drop out, due to lack of funding

So what if they don't become psychologists or hit the best seller's list with a book that rocks the sociology world? Education never goes to waste. I'm sure a knowledge of psychology and sociology is very helpful, however one spends their lives. Many people get law degrees that never intend to practice law.

Madtown

PS--I'm not for or against athletic scholarships