>
> Universities should be allowed either to pay their athletes without any
> average non-athlete). Limits placed on athletic "scholarships" (which
> really are wages for services rendered) appear to me to be restrictions
> on free trade.
>
> Let's call a grant a grant, and a salary a salary.
>
> As old subscribers to this list know, I believe that need-based grants
> are more in keeping with the spirit of intercollegiate athletics.
>
> Luiz F. Valente
>
 
OK, Folks.  Let's have a little reality-check here.
 
I know the Rick Telanders of the world claim we're exploiting the
student-athlete.  Now let's here the other side of the story.
 
A scholarship, athletic, academic or whatever, enables a student-athlete
to get a free education.  In the case of college hockey, the
student-athlete has other options (i.e. Major Junior).  Nobody is dragging
the student-athlete to their school and telling them they have no other
option.  This MAY NOT be true with football or basketball, but the bottom
line is:  It costs a LOT more than just the scholarship money to put a
student-athlete through school and 90% of athletic departments (yes, even
the Big Ten, Big East and the like) run in the red or close to it.  As an
athletic administrator, I can tell you that this is NOT because we're out
there spending money with no regard.  Most athletic departments are the
first to be cut and the last to have their budget supplemented.
 
Let me point out again,  that it costs more than a scholarship for each
student-athlete.  Coaches' salaries,  equipment costs (yikes!),  ice
time,  travel (try that one on for size;  most college hockey schools are
rather isolated) and various other factors jump the cost for each
student-athlete per year dramatically.
 
You had better be selling 4000 or more tickets per night,  Brian
Holzinger or not,  to cover your costs.  NO we should NOT pay
student-athletes.  UNLESS they are going to cover some of these
incidentals.  Give them an education and pay?  Then we're just major
junior hockey.
 
Most of these kids DO use their education.  Persistence rates for
student-athletes,  as well as average GPA,  are FAR above the average
student body.  I would suggest checking with the folks in Kansas on
this.  They compile those statistics every year.
 
At LSSU,  Anthony Palumbo came to school in 1985 looking to build a pro
hockey career.  He is from Soo,  Ontario,  and was well aware of his
opportunities in major junior.  However,  he opted for an education as
well.  When he was done,  the Rangers offered him a meager contract.  He
said no and came back to get his master's degree.  He is now a successful
banker in Sault Ste. Marie.  His background as a Laker hockey player
helped him in the community and his dedication to education helped him
earn a job.  The opportunity is presented to each student-athlete,  but
it's up to him/her to take advantage of it.
 
A student-athlete should not be looked down upon or penalized for leaving
school if the deal is right.  The problem there is greedy agents (only
some) and kids with stars in their eyes.  The best advice to a kid
contemplating an early department:  one-way,  guaranteed contract. That
kid will be able to come back and finish school when they're ready.  In
the mean time,  why not make the top salary they can make,  while they
can make it?
 
And by no means should we pay student-athletes.  You want to stop some of
the corruption with big-time athletics?  Find me a backer and let's start
a major junior basketball or football league.  You will see the problem
solve itself!
 
S. Monaghan
Assistant Athletic Director
Lake Superior State University