U.S. senator: Jim Harbaugh’s pay illustrates ‘civil rights crisis’ in college football
I wonder how some of these people get elected. He’s a little late to the game. To me, he appears to be one of those that wants to be seen walking into the game instead of actually watching the game.
His thinking is convoluted (IMO) for the most part, even though he had 1, maybe 2 good points.
(I agree that $55M on a facility is absurd, but, the big schools need to keep pace to entice the talent.)
Maybe he/politicians should give 80% their fundraising cash back to serve the people instead of using it to get re-elected.
I wonder why he didn’t go after a company in his state, ESPN, for helping to cause many of these financial disparities.
He “inadvertently” forgot to say:
Most states have enacted, or are in the process of enacting laws, allowing “student”/athletes to benefit off the field.
The “student”/athletes do receive the room/board and the opportunity to earn an education.
The “student”/athletes do not have to accept any scholarship, if they so choose.
My guess is that Coach Harbaugh/U of M would like to have lower costs/salaries, but the real problem is that the TV companies and sponsors (Nike, Coke, Under Armour, etc...) are the ones driving the high prices. The senator should start here, just like the sponsors put the pressure on the Washington team of the NFL.
August 3rd, 2020 at 12:44 PM ^
I wonder how some of these people get elected. He’s a little late to the game. To me, he appears to be one of those that wants to be seen walking into the game instead of actually watching the game.
https://www.rollcall.com/2019/03/28/sen-chris-murphy-calls-college-athl… Here is in March 2019 saying the same thing.
His thinking is convoluted (IMO) for the most part, even though he had 1, maybe 2 good points.
(I agree that $55M on a facility is absurd, but, the big schools need to keep pace to entice the talent.)
If only they had some sort of other mechanism for attracting talent that didn't involve setting money ablaze to cry poor all the time.
Maybe he/politicians should give 80% their fundraising cash back to serve the people instead of using it to get re-elected.
Red herring #1. Currently, elections require huge sums of money. Here is Senator Murphy's stance on election funding reform for your perusal https://www.murphy.senate.gov/issues/election-reform
I wonder why he didn’t go after a company in his state, ESPN, for helping to cause many of these financial disparities.
Red Herring #2. ESPN pays for the rights to games, they didn't create nor do they enforce rules about where the money is spent.
He “inadvertently” forgot to say:
Most states have enacted, or are in the process of enacting laws, allowing “student”/athletes to benefit off the field.
Do you think that Senators don't have any say or influence on laws? They may not always have the sway on the national level but they certainly know people in their own states.
The “student”/athletes do receive the room/board and the opportunity to earn an education.
Would you be cool with your employer saying you can have a room, meal plan, and tuition reimbursement with no other income? What if you were making your company millions and they said that?
The “student”/athletes do not have to accept any scholarship, if they so choose.
Sure, just like I don't have to accept employment but I enjoy a house and food. It also wouldn't stop me from asking for a raise if I felt I deserved it.
My guess is that Coach Harbaugh/U of M would like to have lower costs/salaries, but the real problem is that the TV companies and sponsors (Nike, Coke, Under Armour, etc...) are the ones driving the high prices. The senator should start here, just like the sponsors put the pressure on the Washington team of the NFL.
The high prices aren't the issue. The money going to everyone but the labor is the issue. The answer to, "How do we fix this." Isn't price fixing.
August 3rd, 2020 at 12:55 PM ^
When WMU fires dozens of teaching grad assistants, who lose their entire income and their entire tuition benefit, but retains every coach in the athletic department, it's a decided sign to me that the administration has lost its focus on academics.
Most of the exobitant money spent on coaches and athletic facilities would, IMO, be better spent keeping tuition down so we stop graduating young adults who have a home mortgage worth of non-dismissable debt without a liquid asset.
I not going to say whether it's a civil rights issue, but I certainly see it as a massive issue of economic rights.
Moronic take by the senator.
I’m all for changing the NCAA model to better compensate players with insurance, annuities, benefits from their likeness, etc.
But regarding high profile coaches...Do they bring in more $ to the school than they cost the school? - If the answer is yes, this is a simple equation - the coach is worth it financially.
How the universities choose to spend and distribute those funds is what should be up for debate/discussion.
How the universities choose to spend and distribute those funds is what should be up for debate/discussion.
Like how they choose to spend and distribute those funds to coaches?
A friggin' politician accusing anyone of being paid unfairly high is.......RICH, to say the least.
Now this is just envy.
Murphy earns $174K salary per year, not including all of the usual Washington DC endorsements, PAC and other "grease-the-skids" money from bankers.
Like all American politicians, he's woefully overpaid.
If Dantini had coached this season like he planned and not run off like a coward his total compensation for 2020 would have made him the second highest paid coach behind only Saban. Just sayin.
Even as partisan Senators go, Murphy is especially dumb. Most of the time I see his tweets it's because he is demagogueing against something he clearly knows nothing about. This is one of those cases.
He didn't talk about how his alma mater, in the state he represents, is paying its basketball coaches over $5M combined, even though the athletic department cannot be operating at profit since they're in a minor conference with no big TV deal. Instead, he tries to embarrass a coach and program that is states away. What a dolt.
Yes, he picks a higher profile coach which is likely to significantly amply the power of his tweet, rather than tweeting about coaches no one is likely to care about. Clearly a dolt. i’m going to guess that as a member of the Senate committee on education who has been working on this very issue for at least a year, he knows significantly more about it than you.
As I’ve noted, there is a good reason that he made an example of a big name midwestern coach. Just as there is a good reason he mentioned a western conference commissioner and a southern/eastern conference facility upgrade. It’s a tweet, not a white paper, not a legislative proposal. It’s whole purpose is to raise awareness of an issue, not to lay out all of the solutions. Would he have gotten anywhere near the press coverage and discussion on the issue if he’d just focused on U-Conn?
...as a member of the Senate committee on education ...
Pretty much says it all. Murphy is an a$$.
Calling out Harbaugh indivudually is a little suspect and not necessary... but I agree. More of the millions (billions??) generated by college football should be going to the student athletes.
Whether thats in straight payments, trusts, amenities, etc. Surprised abt the response since the site generally seems behind athletes getting paid
Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut...
Could have ended the article right there. That guy isn't fit to be a dog catcher - and that is not meant to be a slam on dog catchers. He is just trying to jump on the "current" bandwagon. Probably upset that he didn't get his participation trophy in pee-wee flag football.
Indeed sir, indeed. Dims are never happy unless they have something to complain about. JH is worth his pay.
Of course he would be saying this...he is a communist...I mean a democrat!!!
Cheers!!
GO BLUE!!