Cheer is not an NCAA sport.
What kind of business is a College + how does this relate to player and scholarships?
- Thread starter Carlsbad7
- Start date
It doesn't matter. The question at hand is whether it can sustain as a salaried sport. The reason it's not an NCAA sport is because the colleges already tried that...they wanted their cheer programs (in the days before competitive cheer) to count to offset the gridiron football numbers. The govt wouldn't have it...they wanted to give women equal access to the same types of sports men had (which left colleges with the football problem, considering d1 schools have so many players on roster and so many scholarship players). However, if you are paying your athletes, you now have the argument that a) cheerleading has changed in the interim, b) and unlike other sports, it has a sustainable business model where you could actually pay your athletes. The problem (which will be the same as women's soccer) is that the market doesn't sustain the same salaries as men's football and basketball. But if you are going to force them (under title ix....which again arguably doesn't apply here) to pay equivalent money, the primary objection of the govt should go away (considering that cheer has the potential to become moderate business that partially offsets costs...at least better than field hockey, swimming or even most women's soccer programs).
The College Athletes Who Are Allowed to Make Big Bucks: Cheerleaders (Published 2020)
Because cheerleading is not governed by the N.C.A.A., its participants can sign lucrative endorsement deals that would lead to punishment for most college athletes, including soon-to-be N.F.L. and N.B.A. millionaires.
It doesn't matter. The question at hand is whether it can sustain as a salaried sport. The reason it's not an NCAA sport is because the colleges already tried that...they wanted their cheer programs (in the days before competitive cheer) to count to offset the gridiron football numbers. The govt wouldn't have it...they wanted to give women equal access to the same types of sports men had (which left colleges with the football problem, considering d1 schools have so many players on roster and so many scholarship players). However, if you are paying your athletes, you now have the argument that a) cheerleading has changed in the interim, b) and unlike other sports, it has a sustainable business model where you could actually pay your athletes. The problem (which will be the same as women's soccer) is that the market doesn't sustain the same salaries as men's football and basketball. But if you are going to force them (under title ix....which again arguably doesn't apply here) to pay equivalent money, the primary objection of the govt should go away (considering that cheer has the potential to become moderate business that partially offsets costs...at least better than field hockey, swimming or even most women's soccer programs).
.The College Athletes Who Are Allowed to Make Big Bucks: Cheerleaders (Published 2020)
Because cheerleading is not governed by the N.C.A.A., its participants can sign lucrative endorsement deals that would lead to punishment for most college athletes, including soon-to-be N.F.L. and N.B.A. millionaires.www.nytimes.com
I have been reading your cock-eyed opinions all through this thread. I think you best sum up your position with " I'd prefer it if the entire forest just burned to the ground. "
Interesting to think that this concept is radical...I don't think European countries are the only ones with no real sports in college.
There are 200+ countries in this world, USA is the only one with this concept of college sports.
Agree. Colleges is basically trying to make money off sports (having a side hustle owning a professional clubs with "amateur" athletes) or using it as marketing purposes.
As usual your contributions to these forums are stunning but you are correct, as I said my preference over the existing system, salary all college athletes or burn it to the ground is burn it to the ground. The corruption in the US college system extends far and wide and spills not only into things like college athletes who get exploited, the pay to play club soccer system, and Kumon/CLC/Mathnasium, but also other aspects of our society such as cultural wars and the meritocratic system....Europe has a system which makes a whole lot more sense and they don't have college athletics (at least not the way we do).
Agree...but you can' take one aspect in the vacuum...they also have a lot fewer elite institutions than we do (Oxford/Cambridge....the top Chinese students for example come here to our top 10....and I don't necessarily regard "fewer elite institutions" as a bad thing), rigorous tracking in arts athletics and academics, they don't have the idea that everyone can or should go to college, they have a very robust apprentice program, they generally have a higher baseline of unemployment they are comfortable with (along with a wider social safety net) and government payment of the majority of tuition.
Any discussion about college athletics, scholarships, eligibility, etc is pretty pointless as long as it refuses to acknowledge the elephant in the room -- gridiron football. Trying to control that sport was the origin of NCAA, and they still haven't figured it out. Kick that out of the NCAA equation and the rest is easy.
I agree with everything you propose above, but it doesn't have to be only for "paid employees". Schools should have these for student athletes or any programs they provide on campus. From what I hear, there appears to be a movement towards this, especially with the movement of https://www.katiessave.org/
We don't need to to get rid of the beauty of college sports and copy other countries. What makes the US unique is nice to have. Like all things, we need continuous tweaking as the crazies figure out a loophole they can abuse and use their low morale to justify why they're abusing the system with the loophole instead of identifying it to the governing bodies to close the loophole.
GoldenGate
GOLD
Scholarships are a scam that make students indentured servants? That is such b.s.
Why should a kid get paid by the hour to play collegiate soccer, but not to play on the chess team? Or the robotics team? Or dance team? ROTC? Why is it that athletics is not part of the educational experience, but sitting in a classroom listening to someone talk about political science is?
So brainiac, if the easy way to solve the problem is to pay women soccer players a wage, where is that money going to come from? Women's soccer loses money even without having to pay players.
What kind of messed up entitlement world do we live in when people like you think that preferential admissions to a college (often elite ones) plus scholarship money makes a student an "indentured servant." If you don't want your kid to get into a great college, if you don't want scholarship money, if you don't want her to play soccer in college, then don't. No one is making your kid do anything. If you want to pay full tuition and not play college soccer, there is literally nothing stopping you. And if it's important for you that your child make money playing a silly child's sport, well, there is already an avenue for that, which is to play in a professional league. Except for the fact, of course, that your kid isn't good enough to make money playing soccer and therefore doesn't deserve a dime no matter how much you think she should be paid by a college to do something that has absolutely zero economic value.
BTW, where do you think these colleges will get the money to pay women by the hour to play soccer given they all already lose money? And are you suggesting that colleges should also be required to pay students to participate in the band, in choir, drama, robotics class, and the chess club? Are you saying colleges should eliminate all scholarships, including academic scholarships? Or is it ok for the drama department to give scholarships, the music department scholarships, and the engineering department scholarships, but a non-revenue generating sport is "special" and deserves to be paid because that would allow you to feed at the trough?
People like you have lost their freakin' minds.
GoldenGate
GOLD
Too many people have lost sight of the fact that collegiate sports primarily benefits the students and is simply one of a million different extracurricular activities available at colleges as part of the overall enrichment experience. It is no different than participating in a student play, orchestra, chess club, robotics teams, student government, greek life, or young democrats. Why is it that people lose their minds believing that playing women's college soccer is somehow special and deserving of pay, but playing the flute in an orchestra through the music department, or participating in a school play through the drama department is not? Or are people saying colleges should pay students for everything they might do?
The fact is that college sports is just part of the college educational experience. For the vast majority, the reality is their athletic ability is just not worth a penny, and the entire existence of college sports is for their benefit. For a very few, however, it is also a teaching tool to help them become professionals at what they're doing, just like engineering class and participating on a robotics team is a teaching tool to help others become professionals at what they're good at. Why is it that parents whose kids play sports think their kid is somehow special and should be paid to do something that has no real economic value whatsoever?