None of these athletes are living in squalor. They have real housing, real food, real clothing. All they have to do is bide their time for a few years, for a shot at making money that will make them part of the "1%". I don't think that's too much to ask.
I would not use the term bide their time. While they do not live in squalor, they are being asked to essentially work a full time job AND go to school. At least the ones who do not cheat.
Now that is not a big undertaking because plenty of college kids do that...but they also get a paycheck.
And they get a free education in that time. Whiskey could probably tell us what the difference is, over a lifetime, between having a degree from Notre Dame and a degree from Jerkwater Community College. How about we add that to the "compensation" that student-athletes receive?
Two points on this.
1 - The education part has flaws because 4 years are not currently guaranteed. The value of from [University] v. Jerkwater Community College is based on the degree...not attending.
2 - A college education for me is really valued with how much you actually get out of it. If you're forced to just do what's needed to remain eligible, you're not getting the full value there.
For me, until 4 or 5 years is guaranteed at a school to a student athlete in exchange for them playing a sport it's not valid to use the 'education as compensation' argument.
Notre Dame does it right but most schools don't.
The VAST majority of monies that the schools receive, based on athletic competition, goes back into the school. It is reinvested in real property, increased travel experiences for the athletes, better facilities for the athletes, and better professors and coaches.
A lot of that money is wasted. It's spent...simply to be spend. Everyone knows that. That is the game.
I get the idea that it would be ideal if the monies generated from college sports went directly back to the students performing in those activities, but that's just not the way the world works. My CEO drives a brand new (2014... he upgrades every two years) Mercedes C class and owns a very nice condo about a block from the beach in Port Hueneme, CA. I do 95% of the actual work, and I live in a 2BR apartment built 33 years ago, and drive a Subaru. I would love to make more, but I have a pretty decent gig. So do these student-athletes...
Here is the thing about your comparison. You consider your deal acceptable. That's fine. But you have the choice to change it. You can start your own company and get paid 100% on the 95% of the work you do. But there are risks there. Nothing wrong with your deal.
That said, I don't have the right to say if your deal is fair or not. And you're really not in the position to say if a kid playing football at an SEC school is getting a good deal. It's a personal decision.
My personal opinion is a majority of the kids playing college football place little value on the education. They all talk the game but they really just want a good chance of making the NFL and they would be happy with the opportunity to place 100% of their focus on this goal for a period of 3-4 years. Hell, many already do....
Beyond this, ESPN does not really care if it's Michigan v. Notre Dame or a semi pro league playing. As long as they can fill their schedule with football games that people want to watch...that's all that matters. The same can be said about the NFL. They really don't care about the student athlete or their education. They just want the best possible farm system for their league. Now ESPN and the NFL are not going to come out and say this but that's the reality in my opinion.
So how long does it take for some group of very rich people to see the wall coming down and get ahead of the game? How long before you see a professional farm system for football players in the US. You would not even need a big league.
Just what would college football look like if a league of just 16 teams existed where players were paid $50K a year and were able to train year round. Just what does the 'value' an education look like to a kid where his whole family makes less than ~$20k a year.
Just how much would ESPN be willing to pay the SEC for their games when the majority of the top 100 players each year are playing semi-pro football rather than playing for a coach making $5M a year?
The VAST majority of monies you talked about would become much smaller. It would be MAC or Conference USA type funds.
