Since some folks are wondering why we refer to the NC$$ with the double- dollar sign, here from "Undue Process" is a list of some of the benefits enjoyed by some employees of the NC$$ (note that in the last year reported in the book, 1989-90, the NC$$ grossed more than $98 million in revenues): * No-cost rented cars * No-interest or low-interest home mortgages * Free legal advice, cost built into the organization's $1 million-plus annual legal tab * Free entrance to NC$$ championship events * Flying first class to meetings, accommodations in expensive hotels and treatment to free entertainment by sports-related interests * $100 in extra travel expenses if committee member elects to fly coach in addition to $30/day annual meeting expenses In addition, a couple of years ago, the NC$$ took a $1.75 million loan to buy its own jet, then sold it to a private company which leased it back to the NC$$. It then hired a director of aviation and budgeted over $250,000 for aircraft maintenance. The price tag of the plane is 4x larger than the entire athletic dept. budget of some DivI schools, says Yaeger. And, in 1989, the NC$$ spent over half a million dollars to hire lobbyists and work in Washington to ensure that a bill (eventually passed) in Congress that made public the graduation rates of student-athletes would not include any reduction in the NC$$'s authority to regulate collegiate athletics. It also provided a huge buffet reception at the Final Four in Seattle for a number of members of Congress who it had invited there, as part of that lobbying effort. The author adds that the NC$$ also has (or had, I don't know their status now) two for-profit subsidiaries, the National Collegiate Realty Corporation and the NC$$ Marketing Corporation; the first controlled more than $7.4 million in land and property at the end of 1989. At the end of its fiscal year in August 1989, the NC$$ had more than $21 million in the bank. Yaeger notes that "these are benefits being enjoyed by employees of the NC$$ [$$ mine] - a not-for-profit organization formed to govern college sports. All while the rules say student-athletes must be limited to room, board, tuition, fees and books." (page 108) One final comment, this mine: It does appear that a body such as those with the principles which the NC$$ was founded upon, which truly acts primarily in the best interests of the student-athletes of US college sports, is something desired and probably even needed. The question being raised is whether what we have now actually accomplishes that and does so in a fair and equitable manner. I submit that what is listed above and the other things we know of the NC$$ are simply an extension of a principle that has permeated college sports and even colleges themselves: that collegiate athletics, and college itself to a degree, is actually a business not much unlike any other in the US. By itself, that is not bad. The problem that arises is when this business represents itself as something that it is not - and I'll refer you to the quote I gave above. I tend to think the NC$$ would enjoy a higher degree of respect if it ceased this amateuristic posturing and admitted that there is a lot of money to be made out there, and it is out to grab its piece of the pie. Given the NC$$'s mission, that should also mean turning some of that pie back to the student-athletes - not necessarily by paying them, but perhaps by cutting out some of these perks and returning the profits to the schools themselves, to be used to benefit them more directly. But in the end, it really comes down to the schools themselves to make this happen, doesn't it... --- Mike Machnik [log in to unmask] Color Voice of the Merrimack Warriors alternate address days: [log in to unmask] *HMN* 11/13/93 (Any opinions expressed above are strictly those of the poster.)