PhD candidates who work in research labs are paid and if they aren't something is dreadfully wrong. The person bringing in those millions of research dollars is the person running the lab, not the research assistants, so the analogy between that activity and football isn't quite there.
Hate to post/agree with a Davey J piece, but...
- Thread starter Player2BNamedL8r
- Start date
PhD candidates who work in research labs are paid and if they aren't something is dreadfully wrong. The person bringing in those millions of research dollars is the person running the lab, not the research assistants, so the analogy between that activity and football isn't quite there.
Think what would happen if anyone anywhere could actually hear his show on Sat mornings!
Well not every football player is created equal either. We going to scale these player payments or are you ok paying Saquan Barkley the same rate as John Thomas because their contributions are not even on the same planet.
And the way the pay the player argument goes if the lowly research assistant is working in a lab making millions then pony up. After all the lab is making millions.
The argument for paying players is not based solely on the surplus a sport generates. Scale pay according to contribution/performance. Stud running back gets more than bench ballast.
Research assistants can and do share in the spoils when they make significant contributions to processes/products discovered in a lab that are sold to a commercial venture.
How are prices set and who sets them? During recruiting, that means bidding wars and aggravated imbalances and may further encourage illicit payments. If after the fact, as in your research example, that begs the question of measurement and leads to dissension.
An alternative is a fixed increased stipend for all, plus maybe variable profits directly attributable to an individual player (e.g., jersey sales), though that leaves open the question of how big the fixed pie is and whether it varies by school.
Same way it's done in, say, the NFL: negotiation followed by a contract. There may be "imbalances" but who can say they'll be worse than those that presently exist? As for "illicit" payments, when was the last time you heard of them in a pro league?
Come on Art. You're too smart a guy to think a system where we are paying scaled wages to college kids is a good or workable solution. And again players are getting a stipend in addition to basically having every need taken care of while under scholarship. If they need more, perish the thought, but how about a job in the summer like kids have done for 100 years.
Either end the notion of the student athlete and create minor leagues distinct from the school or deal with being an amateur.
The dollars certainly come from the schools.Whether there are caps depends on what the new landscape looks like. Theree are any number of possibilities.
Then I must be dumber than you think.
As for the concept of "student-athlete," look to its genesis in the words, no less, of the person who coined it:
https://www.riskmanagementmonitor.c...student-athlete-to-avoid-paying-workers-comp/
Similar threads
