Last month, the New York Times Magazine ran a kick-tush article advocating paying college athletes in football and basketball for their services. The arguments have been made before in other forums, but the economic data in the article was most impressive. The article drew a rejoinder from Tom McMillian. Mr.. McMillian was an excellent college basketball player himself (the Maryland Bill Walton to us west-coasters) and he then served as a U.S. Congressman. His rejoinder was that this could not work because it would be violative of Title IX as women athletes would not be covered.
While I wax and wane on whether we should abandon all pretense of amateur big-sport athletics, seems to me that the proposal would pass muster as long as the payments are defined by revenue generated by the sport and not by limitation to boys and men. In other words, if women’s college tennis can generate the revenue, why not pay them? Thoughts readers?
Photo credit: http://nephos.wordpress.com/