Harbinger wrote:
Quote:
My overly simple answer is still the fact that nobody is *forcing* you (the player) to accept the deal. ... I don't see that failure as a valid argument against the current model.Actually, the NCAA is forcing them to accept their deal, on their terms, without negotiation, or they cannot compete anywhere in the U.S. I've always thought that was illegal and violated the Anti-Trust laws, in part because they make an agreement between universities in every state to limit what they will pay their employees. Jeffrey Kessler, an Anti-Trust lawyer is litigating this issue currently.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...m_term=.72d44cb3e79a
In summary, my argument is that the current model is illegal.
Horseshit, they are free to play in the NBA G-league or any other semi-pro league if they're good enough. Funny how the student-athlete model as it was originally designed still works pretty much as intended for every other sport; it's only become bastardized by big-money deals in 2 sports out of at least a couple dozen, but that still doesn't make the students 'employees' in the same way. Those 2 are the exception to a system that otherwise works just fine. Again ~ don't like it, don't take the deal, just like I don't have to take a job if I don't like the compensation package or join a club if I don't like the terms of membership.
I think the HS analogy is right on... the fundamental concept of having the school's students compete in organized sporting events among other schools of similar size/standing doesn't hinge on how much the coach gets paid or how much the fans pay for tickets. That only affects the volume of noise surrounding it.