Hey, it’s a start.

Wichita State’s athletic director is at least willing to have a discussion about player compensation.

On the subject of paying athletes, the Wichita State AD said he believes athletes should be paid.

But it comes down to value, the sport, and how do you pay the players.

“You take a basketball team,” Boatright began. “One or two kids probably are marketable. Landry Shamet last year, he probably could’ve brought a little money. He had value, but you have kids on the end of the bench that don’t bring any value. Do you pay them the same? If so, why?”

All good questions.  I suspect that the garbage coming out with the basketball fraud case is making athletic directors, or the realistic ones, anyway, face up to what a black market in high schoolers (and parents) says about the value of some student-athletes.  You’d think it would behoove the NCAA and schools to get proactive with this, but who are we kidding here?

9 Comments

Filed under The NCAA

9 responses to “Hey, it’s a start.

  1. gastr1

    I’m very curious what the University of Kansas has to say about this, given that Bill Self’s texts were included in the evidence presented to the FBI re: knowing about Adidas’s payments to players.

    As for WSU, the school can be a little more open about this because it has no football team and, therefore, a much smaller number of marketable athletes.

    Like

  2. Let the players license their own image. Players that have value will bring in money. Those that don’t, won’t.

    Like

    • gastr1

      Yeah, I once thought that was the best way too, but that doesn’t resolve the problem that players in the major college sports are all treated like employees in terms of their time demands, limits on courses and majors, etc.

      Like

      • So what if they are treated like employees? It is an exchange transaction: your ability, time, etc. for a college degree, weekly national exposure, coaching, training, nutrition, network of connected alumni, etc. It is the same as my time at my employer for a paycheck. The real question you are getting at is whether the compensation they receive is fair. That’s also the question the Wichita State ad is asking. Some players have exceptional value. Most others do not. How can you equitably compensate players for the value they create? The answer is to give everyone a base pay (scholarship, room and board, full cost of attendance … we’re talking $40-50K of value tax free per year here, not to mention the intangibles that are harder to price), and then allow them to make outside money based on their own image. Get the schools out of the business of deciding how much players are worth, and let the fans decide (which is basically how likeness deals work).

        Like

  3. CB

    “You have kids on the end of the bench that don’t bring any value. Do you pay them the same? If so, why?”

    No, same reason you don’t pay interns.

    Like

  4. Down island way

    Is this AD willing to have the discussion because he knows that conversation is not going anywhere fast/soon? Revenue sharing for all sports televised via conference tv contracts makes litigation seem like a viable/ never ending option for student athletes that are starters, relievers, special team members, All Americans, 1st team, 2nd team, 3rd team conference and so on, no matter the venue. Seems as though there is no good ending or landing zone.

    Like