This past week a college basketball coach erupted over a reporters comments about his salary. Click on the following links to view the story (video and story). After viewing and reading this story about Jim Calhoun, what are your thoughts on the commercialization of college sports.? Let's face it, college sports are "big business." Are coaches salaries in college too high? Is there too much money being poured into collegiate athletics? How does this effect the climate of a college campus? This has been an issue since collegiate athletics began. Note statement below:
•Commercialization in college athletics must be diminished and college sport must rise to a point where it is esteemed primarily and sincerely for the opportunities it affords to mature youth under responsibility, to exercise at once the body and the mind, and to foster habits both of bodily health and of those high qualities of character which, until they are revealed in action, we accept on faith (American College Athletics, 1929).
Do you agree with this report from 1929 or disagree?
I both agree and disagree with the statement from 1929. Although universities should probably be less commercialized, it is because of commercialization that makes particular universities so well known today. Without the media attention that some universities get, people wouldnt even think twice about them. Students often times choose a univeristy based on the fact that the media has portrayed it as a great school who has done great in sports. I do agree that these universities must represent a place that provides opportunities to help mature the youth responsibly, but many times commercialization is involved. As for the arguement about the salaries of college coaches, I think that it all depends on the circumstance. If schools are bringing in millions of dollar, such as Conneticut, then I believe a high coaching salary is perfectly acceptable. But salaries such as Nick Saban's I believe exceed the limit. Although he is a huge icon and has lead Alabama to great heights, I think that money could have been used elsewhere, especially in this terrible economy. But overall, I think that an appropriate amount of money has been put into college athletics. Athletics are a big business and there is no reason universities shouldnt be able to profit off the good fortunes of sports.
I do not completely agree with the 1929 statement. I don't think commercialization should be "diminished." However, I do feel like commercialization of college sports have drifted into more of a business rather than focus on the values of academics and competing in collegiate sports. I've heard it's like an "arms race" among colleges because of the intense competition in recruiting and coaching. For that reason, its costing alot of money to be spent on salaries and facilities. Commercialization helps big-time colleges get their program to be known and that does help with recruiting and sponsorship. Then again, like I said before, there is concern that commercialization focuses on performace in sports over academic performance. Nick Saban's salary is pretty high I'd have to say, but I do think high paid coaches are compensated pretty evenly if they can make a program of a team well-known and successful among other colleges.
I'm not from the Washington area, but if there wasn't the athletic mystique of WSU, I probably wouldn't have come here. With WSU and other colleges the sport programs are becoming ever more commecialized. With consideration of the statement from 1929 I do agree in part that it is getting out of hand that sports pretty much takes precedence over academics on college campuses. Also, this commercialization is not only changing college campuses, but it also is hurting the mid major colleges who can't keep up with the big dogs. I think that sports do get a ridiculous amount of attention and money and coaches do get paid a grip. However, this is like a snowball effect and it is getting bigger and bigger and if a college does not have the athletics it is sometimes the sticking point that will sway supporters, fans, applicants, and recruits to the way of the big schools. Colleges need to be seen more as academic instituions and sports should be secondary to academics. Is college sports the major socializing process as the 1929 quote suggests? I disagree, but attention and money should be drawn off of college sports and back to academia.
I feel like it sends a bad message when a coach makes hundreds of thousands more than a university president. However, I think the comments from 1929 show that commercialism in college athletics isn't a new problem. When incidents like the one with coach Calhoun happen people tend to think things are getting worse, but in reality academic reform in college athletics is improving and things are in many ways getting increasingly better.
I do partly agree woth the 1929 report. i do think primarily college should be for education purposes and should have a priority over sport. the fact is though we all love sport, and we are attracted to it and pay high amounts to spectate it. when people in sport are able to generate large amounts of money through the sport there is no reason why they shouldn't receive large amounts of money themselves. if anyone was in there position they would not object taking home large pay checks. in coach calhouns case he is paid $1.6 because he brings in $12. think of what that money can do for the university itself and he deserves a cut of that number. large revenues in sport in college is acceptable so long as it brings new opportunities to students and helps the university in academic and financial matters.
I agree with this statement from 1929. College sports have grown into a business for athletic departments and universities. The focus of college sports is no longer an opportunity for athletes to become educated and develop their physical skills. It has become a competition among athletic teams to continually win and bring in the most money. Winning teams bring in more fans and more money, and colleges strive on winning athletic programs especially in football and men’s basketball. When talking about collegiate athletics, key words that come up include revenue sharing, sponsorships, win-loss records, and media rights. These are all topics that should be discussed primarily with professional sports. With the growth of collegiate athletics as a business within the university, it has affected the image of a college campus. Images are heightened if the athletic teams are winning. People think positively of the university if its athletic teams are winning games and championships. The growth of athletics has defeated the main purpose of a university’s existence to provide higher education for students. Unfortunately, universities support the athletic teams to enhance their image and increased visibility. They support the choices made by the athletic department in their coaches, staff, and student-athletes. And for the most part, coaches often become the face of the university. With such responsibilities, coaches are paid very well for their effect on the university ranging from six to seven figure salaries. In 2007, USC head football coach Pete Carroll earned $2.7 million, and Oklahoma head football coach Bob Stoops earned a total of $3.6 million. In 2006, Florida men’s basketball coach Billy Donovan earned $1.3 million. As mentioned recently, University of Connecticut men’s basketball coach Jim Calhoun is earning $1.6 million. It is pretty evident that coaches are being paid a significant amount of money for their efforts for winning at their respective universities, but it is an outrageous amount of money. Universities and athletic departments need to realize their goals and look over the mission statement. College athletics are not professional sports.
College coaches should get payed a lot! They are the best at what they do! It is supply and demand. If one school does not want to pay a lot, they do not have to. However, i am sure there is another school that would be happy to pay a coach a lot of money. University of Arizona comes to mind. They are a school who would pay a lot of money for a big name coach. I agree with the report. College sports are there to develop the athletes. However, in doing so, college sports have also produced a large commercial market. Why shouldn't college sports use their product as a business as well as an opportunity to teach young athletes? I think college sports and the NCAA are doing a great job at selling their product.
I think that when a program is bringing in way more than what they are paying the coach, I dont think that there is a way for the people to criticize a coach on how much he makes. I think that over commercialization of college sports was inevitable, so there is nothing that we can do about it, college sports is a business as much as people hate to admit it. Sometimes when I see a schools athletic budget it blows me away, but if a school can make money then in the end it is worth it. So I think that when a coach makes a bunch of money, it is usually justified.
Man, after the recent low blow from Tony Bennett, I think that my view on this topic has slightly changed. College coaches spend more time then anyone can even imagine, doing what they do. I worked with the girls bball team and I cannot tell you how time consuming being a college coach is. You think 40 hours a week is a lot, I'm talking atleast 60+ hours. Its from practice, individuals, dinners, film, media, games, recruiting, flights, road trips...its unbeleiveable the amount of time that goes into being a college coach. Saying this, I believe that college coaches should get paid a lot for what they do. Having a coach leave, out of the blue, to a not prominent ACC school, for twice the salary, tells you something. I mean, going from 800,000 a year, to 1.7 is a drastic change. I cannot tell you that i would not have done the same thing, but it just seems so out of character for Tony to do. I am still shocked along with the rest of the cougar nation.
I don't really agree with the 1929 report. First of all, I think that division 2 and Division 3 athletics accurately represent the characteristics described in the 1929 report. However like many things in our society, the market determines the product, and right now there is a high demand in high Division 1 athletics thus bringing large-scale commercialization. I have no problem with it personally, and I think that if someone doesn't like it that they can shift their allegiances and start to pay more attention to the lower divisions. Athletics are a big deal at a lot of universities, and athletic success can help out a school in so many ways (positive publicity, more student applications, more money coming in, etc). Colleges can become much more appealing to students if their teams are successful.
I partially agree with the 1929 report on the level that maturing youths under responsibility should be the number one priority at universities. A great percentage of resources such as time and money should be allocated to meet this requirement. However I do not think that the commercialization of college athletics needs to be completely diminished. I think universities need to be careful that they are not overly focused on athletics and allocating too great a number of resources to them. But the fact is there is a large number of students who want to attend a university with athletic success. Division I schools must take measures to keep their teams winning because this could play a large role in encouraging students to attend their universities. College sports are a business and I do not think this needs to be changed. Sometimes coaches and participants care too much about the money, but this is seen in many aspects of our society. If a coach builds a successful problem, does their job, and is a part of a university's general success then they should be compensated for what they have done. I am not saying athletics should be all about money, but it is important that we accept it as a business and understand that a lot of money is going to be thrown around.
The statement from 1929 is partially true in that college sports should be used to help develop student athletes physically, socially, and mentally, but at the same time this doesn't require decreased commercialization. A good sports program should be able to develop its student athletes in all aspects of their lives and prepare them for whatever career they choose to enter into including professional sports. I believe that college sports are a reflection of the capitalist economy that we have established in the United States. If a coach or program is more successful than they deserve to be paid more. In order for the university of Connecticut to compete at a level that will generate the amount of revenue that they do requires having a top notch coach, and having an elite coach requires paying them a competitive salary. The university benefits from having a successful athletic program as it undoubtedly has an effect of enrollment and student life.
Commercialization is part of sports and has been for quite awhile. Do I believe it is a bad thing for college athletics, no I do not. College sports can make a lot of money for a school. College sports can help develop a player physically, socially, mentally and so on. But also can take away socially and mentally. By this I mean when you have certain obligations and are treated like a god, what does that say for a player who has to find a career later on and what they will expect from other people later in life if they are not mature enough to handle it in college. The other topic do coaches deserve the high salaries that they receive, I believe they do deserve a high salary, but as high as they are, no. I figure six figures should be good enough for a coach, not seven. They do do a lot for a college for recruiting regular students and can help bring in a lot of money for the university, but are we not loosing sight of one of the main reasons for college. That being education, shouldn't the coach understand that and want to see not only student athletes succeed but also the average student. Couldn't that money go to help create a better college experience for everyone? I am not arguing that college coaches do not do a lot for colleges and other organizations, but in hindsight I see if the coach wants to work for an university, especially in the economy and the way colleges are cutting budgets and programs, shouldn't the coach understand that they can have a great life with a six figure salary instead of a seven and help out all students on a campus in more ways then just getting donations? I think they should. Some salaries have definitely gotten out of hand.
I think that Calhoun was very accurate when he said that compared with the money that his program brings to the university, his salary is not outragous. Sports are a big business in college but they are also beneficial for the school as a whole. There has been a few studies showing that schools that have had recent success in sports generally have higher admissions for the next year because people want to go to schools that they percieve as winners even if its on the athletic front. I disagree with the 1929 report because sports as a whole have been so commercialized that athletes will just go overseas to pursue the next level. At least if these kids are in school for a year then they are getting some sort of education and if they are successful at sports in generally brings the university up with them.
I agree with the statement from 1929. NCAA is one of the biggest success in business. The college sports makes profit and business success. Most of college sports teams are working to make winning teams to get more profit, fans and higher name value of the university. The colleges are looking for good coaches to make their team winning. The roles of coaches are not just winning the game. They are helping and developning their team players(students) physically, socially, and mentally. It means coaches have lots of stuffs to do, not only winning the game. They would get better salary if they show their ability to make their team, college better.
College sports are slowly becoming what professional sports have become to be, a business. Nearly all sports stadiums in college sports are being funded by corporate businesses rather than by school idols or icons. Contracts are coming through daily to schools that think they need money. I don't think it affects the student population. Students are still going to school for academics. They are slowly getting concerened where their tuition money is going towards. And a porton is going to athletics. I agree with the statement above. Big business should only be dealt with professional sports.
I do agree that sports should focus more on the development of athletes rather than the commercialization factor. Sports have become so focussed on business and profit, that many lose sight of what is really important. Athletes' perception of what is valued is also flawed. Instead of focussing on their development and the enjoyment of the game, many find their thoughts tangled in financial benefits and making it to the next level to receive their extrinsic rewards. I do believe that college coaches are paid to much as well. Although they contribute to the financial success of the university, professors contribute to the overall benefit of society by teaching our youth. I love sports and everything they represent, but I believe academics should be more heavily rewarded and focussed upon.
Coaching at the NCAA level especially in the main money making sports like basketball and football are high pressure jobs. These men and women are paid to win games and if they don't win then the University thinks nothing of it to fire them. Some of the reasons they are paid more than others is they work for countless hours a day researching, teaching, coaching etc. College sports has become a big business which is unfortunate because some of the greatest games ever played were in the college greats and the business takes away from the integrity of the game. College is meant for Amateurs but soon college athletics will end up like the Pros; comeplete sellouts
I both agree and disagree with the statement from 1929. Although universities should probably be less commercialized, it is because of commercialization that makes particular universities so well known today. Without the media attention that some universities get, people wouldnt even think twice about them. Students often times choose a univeristy based on the fact that the media has portrayed it as a great school who has done great in sports. I do agree that these universities must represent a place that provides opportunities to help mature the youth responsibly, but many times commercialization is involved. As for the arguement about the salaries of college coaches, I think that it all depends on the circumstance. If schools are bringing in millions of dollar, such as Conneticut, then I believe a high coaching salary is perfectly acceptable. But salaries such as Nick Saban's I believe exceed the limit. Although he is a huge icon and has lead Alabama to great heights, I think that money could have been used elsewhere, especially in this terrible economy. But overall, I think that an appropriate amount of money has been put into college athletics. Athletics are a big business and there is no reason universities shouldnt be able to profit off the good fortunes of sports.
ReplyDeleteI do not completely agree with the 1929 statement. I don't think commercialization should be "diminished." However, I do feel like commercialization of college sports have drifted into more of a business rather than focus on the values of academics and competing in collegiate sports. I've heard it's like an "arms race" among colleges because of the intense competition in recruiting and coaching. For that reason, its costing alot of money to be spent on salaries and facilities. Commercialization helps big-time colleges get their program to be known and that does help with recruiting and sponsorship. Then again, like I said before, there is concern that commercialization focuses on performace in sports over academic performance. Nick Saban's salary is pretty high I'd have to say, but I do think high paid coaches are compensated pretty evenly if they can make a program of a team well-known and successful among other colleges.
ReplyDeleteI'm not from the Washington area, but if there wasn't the athletic mystique of WSU, I probably wouldn't have come here. With WSU and other colleges the sport programs are becoming ever more commecialized. With consideration of the statement from 1929 I do agree in part that it is getting out of hand that sports pretty much takes precedence over academics on college campuses. Also, this commercialization is not only changing college campuses, but it also is hurting the mid major colleges who can't keep up with the big dogs. I think that sports do get a ridiculous amount of attention and money and coaches do get paid a grip. However, this is like a snowball effect and it is getting bigger and bigger and if a college does not have the athletics it is sometimes the sticking point that will sway supporters, fans, applicants, and recruits to the way of the big schools. Colleges need to be seen more as academic instituions and sports should be secondary to academics. Is college sports the major socializing process as the 1929 quote suggests? I disagree, but attention and money should be drawn off of college sports and back to academia.
ReplyDeleteI feel like it sends a bad message when a coach makes hundreds of thousands more than a university president. However, I think the comments from 1929 show that commercialism in college athletics isn't a new problem. When incidents like the one with coach Calhoun happen people tend to think things are getting worse, but in reality academic reform in college athletics is improving and things are in many ways getting increasingly better.
ReplyDeleteI do partly agree woth the 1929 report. i do think primarily college should be for education purposes and should have a priority over sport. the fact is though we all love sport, and we are attracted to it and pay high amounts to spectate it. when people in sport are able to generate large amounts of money through the sport there is no reason why they shouldn't receive large amounts of money themselves. if anyone was in there position they would not object taking home large pay checks. in coach calhouns case he is paid $1.6 because he brings in $12. think of what that money can do for the university itself and he deserves a cut of that number. large revenues in sport in college is acceptable so long as it brings new opportunities to students and helps the university in academic and financial matters.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this statement from 1929. College sports have grown into a business for athletic departments and universities. The focus of college sports is no longer an opportunity for athletes to become educated and develop their physical skills. It has become a competition among athletic teams to continually win and bring in the most money. Winning teams bring in more fans and more money, and colleges strive on winning athletic programs especially in football and men’s basketball. When talking about collegiate athletics, key words that come up include revenue sharing, sponsorships, win-loss records, and media rights. These are all topics that should be discussed primarily with professional sports. With the growth of collegiate athletics as a business within the university, it has affected the image of a college campus. Images are heightened if the athletic teams are winning. People think positively of the university if its athletic teams are winning games and championships. The growth of athletics has defeated the main purpose of a university’s existence to provide higher education for students. Unfortunately, universities support the athletic teams to enhance their image and increased visibility. They support the choices made by the athletic department in their coaches, staff, and student-athletes. And for the most part, coaches often become the face of the university. With such responsibilities, coaches are paid very well for their effect on the university ranging from six to seven figure salaries. In 2007, USC head football coach Pete Carroll earned $2.7 million, and Oklahoma head football coach Bob Stoops earned a total of $3.6 million. In 2006, Florida men’s basketball coach Billy Donovan earned $1.3 million. As mentioned recently, University of Connecticut men’s basketball coach Jim Calhoun is earning $1.6 million. It is pretty evident that coaches are being paid a significant amount of money for their efforts for winning at their respective universities, but it is an outrageous amount of money. Universities and athletic departments need to realize their goals and look over the mission statement. College athletics are not professional sports.
ReplyDeleteCollege coaches should get payed a lot! They are the best at what they do! It is supply and demand. If one school does not want to pay a lot, they do not have to. However, i am sure there is another school that would be happy to pay a coach a lot of money. University of Arizona comes to mind. They are a school who would pay a lot of money for a big name coach. I agree with the report. College sports are there to develop the athletes. However, in doing so, college sports have also produced a large commercial market. Why shouldn't college sports use their product as a business as well as an opportunity to teach young athletes? I think college sports and the NCAA are doing a great job at selling their product.
ReplyDeleteI think that when a program is bringing in way more than what they are paying the coach, I dont think that there is a way for the people to criticize a coach on how much he makes. I think that over commercialization of college sports was inevitable, so there is nothing that we can do about it, college sports is a business as much as people hate to admit it. Sometimes when I see a schools athletic budget it blows me away, but if a school can make money then in the end it is worth it. So I think that when a coach makes a bunch of money, it is usually justified.
ReplyDeleteMan, after the recent low blow from Tony Bennett, I think that my view on this topic has slightly changed. College coaches spend more time then anyone can even imagine, doing what they do. I worked with the girls bball team and I cannot tell you how time consuming being a college coach is. You think 40 hours a week is a lot, I'm talking atleast 60+ hours. Its from practice, individuals, dinners, film, media, games, recruiting, flights, road trips...its unbeleiveable the amount of time that goes into being a college coach. Saying this, I believe that college coaches should get paid a lot for what they do. Having a coach leave, out of the blue, to a not prominent ACC school, for twice the salary, tells you something. I mean, going from 800,000 a year, to 1.7 is a drastic change. I cannot tell you that i would not have done the same thing, but it just seems so out of character for Tony to do. I am still shocked along with the rest of the cougar nation.
ReplyDeleteI don't really agree with the 1929 report. First of all, I think that division 2 and Division 3 athletics accurately represent the characteristics described in the 1929 report. However like many things in our society, the market determines the product, and right now there is a high demand in high Division 1 athletics thus bringing large-scale commercialization. I have no problem with it personally, and I think that if someone doesn't like it that they can shift their allegiances and start to pay more attention to the lower divisions. Athletics are a big deal at a lot of universities, and athletic success can help out a school in so many ways (positive publicity, more student applications, more money coming in, etc). Colleges can become much more appealing to students if their teams are successful.
ReplyDeleteI partially agree with the 1929 report on the level that maturing youths under responsibility should be the number one priority at universities. A great percentage of resources such as time and money should be allocated to meet this requirement. However I do not think that the commercialization of college athletics needs to be completely diminished. I think universities need to be careful that they are not overly focused on athletics and allocating too great a number of resources to them. But the fact is there is a large number of students who want to attend a university with athletic success. Division I schools must take measures to keep their teams winning because this could play a large role in encouraging students to attend their universities. College sports are a business and I do not think this needs to be changed. Sometimes coaches and participants care too much about the money, but this is seen in many aspects of our society. If a coach builds a successful problem, does their job, and is a part of a university's general success then they should be compensated for what they have done. I am not saying athletics should be all about money, but it is important that we accept it as a business and understand that a lot of money is going to be thrown around.
ReplyDeleteThe statement from 1929 is partially true in that college sports should be used to help develop student athletes physically, socially, and mentally, but at the same time this doesn't require decreased commercialization. A good sports program should be able to develop its student athletes in all aspects of their lives and prepare them for whatever career they choose to enter into including professional sports. I believe that college sports are a reflection of the capitalist economy that we have established in the United States. If a coach or program is more successful than they deserve to be paid more. In order for the university of Connecticut to compete at a level that will generate the amount of revenue that they do requires having a top notch coach, and having an elite coach requires paying them a competitive salary. The university benefits from having a successful athletic program as it undoubtedly has an effect of enrollment and student life.
ReplyDeleteCommercialization is part of sports and has been for quite awhile. Do I believe it is a bad thing for college athletics, no I do not. College sports can make a lot of money for a school. College sports can help develop a player physically, socially, mentally and so on. But also can take away socially and mentally. By this I mean when you have certain obligations and are treated like a god, what does that say for a player who has to find a career later on and what they will expect from other people later in life if they are not mature enough to handle it in college. The other topic do coaches deserve the high salaries that they receive, I believe they do deserve a high salary, but as high as they are, no. I figure six figures should be good enough for a coach, not seven. They do do a lot for a college for recruiting regular students and can help bring in a lot of money for the university, but are we not loosing sight of one of the main reasons for college. That being education, shouldn't the coach understand that and want to see not only student athletes succeed but also the average student. Couldn't that money go to help create a better college experience for everyone? I am not arguing that college coaches do not do a lot for colleges and other organizations, but in hindsight I see if the coach wants to work for an university, especially in the economy and the way colleges are cutting budgets and programs, shouldn't the coach understand that they can have a great life with a six figure salary instead of a seven and help out all students on a campus in more ways then just getting donations? I think they should. Some salaries have definitely gotten out of hand.
ReplyDeleteI think that Calhoun was very accurate when he said that compared with the money that his program brings to the university, his salary is not outragous. Sports are a big business in college but they are also beneficial for the school as a whole. There has been a few studies showing that schools that have had recent success in sports generally have higher admissions for the next year because people want to go to schools that they percieve as winners even if its on the athletic front. I disagree with the 1929 report because sports as a whole have been so commercialized that athletes will just go overseas to pursue the next level. At least if these kids are in school for a year then they are getting some sort of education and if they are successful at sports in generally brings the university up with them.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statement from 1929. NCAA is one of the biggest success in business. The college sports makes profit and business success. Most of college sports teams are working to make winning teams to get more profit, fans and higher name value of the university. The colleges are looking for good coaches to make their team winning. The roles of coaches are not just winning the game. They are helping and developning their team players(students) physically, socially, and mentally. It means coaches have lots of stuffs to do, not only winning the game. They would get better salary if they show their ability to make their team, college better.
ReplyDeleteCollege sports are slowly becoming what professional sports have become to be, a business. Nearly all sports stadiums in college sports are being funded by corporate businesses rather than by school idols or icons. Contracts are coming through daily to schools that think they need money. I don't think it affects the student population. Students are still going to school for academics. They are slowly getting concerened where their tuition money is going towards. And a porton is going to athletics. I agree with the statement above. Big business should only be dealt with professional sports.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that sports should focus more on the development of athletes rather than the commercialization factor. Sports have become so focussed on business and profit, that many lose sight of what is really important. Athletes' perception of what is valued is also flawed. Instead of focussing on their development and the enjoyment of the game, many find their thoughts tangled in financial benefits and making it to the next level to receive their extrinsic rewards. I do believe that college coaches are paid to much as well. Although they contribute to the financial success of the university, professors contribute to the overall benefit of society by teaching our youth. I love sports and everything they represent, but I believe academics should be more heavily rewarded and focussed upon.
ReplyDeleteCoaching at the NCAA level especially in the main money making sports like basketball and football are high pressure jobs. These men and women are paid to win games and if they don't win then the University thinks nothing of it to fire them. Some of the reasons they are paid more than others is they work for countless hours a day researching, teaching, coaching etc. College sports has become a big business which is unfortunate because some of the greatest games ever played were in the college greats and the business takes away from the integrity of the game. College is meant for Amateurs but soon college athletics will end up like the Pros; comeplete sellouts
ReplyDelete