Should NCAA Athletes Be Paid?
I've wrote about this issue in some of my comments of other blogs, but I've never actually had an article that dealt with this main question. It's easily one of the most debated topics in college sports and there are pros and cons to each side of the argument. This article talks specifically about college basketball and March Madness and the Final Four. Athletic conferences receive millions of dollars from the NCAA if their teams advance deep into the tournament, and the NCAA, as a whole, makes $6 billion annually just from basketball. That's a ridiculous amount of money to be earning especially since they don't have to pay any of the people that are earning them that money. I'd like to know what the NCAA actually does with all of their earnings.
I'm kind of in the middle of this argument. I do not think college players should get paid to play, but I do think they should be able to earn money from autographs or jersey sales and stuff like that. It's only fair that way. The NCAA is making money by selling things with your name on it, so you should get some of the profit. It isn't a good idea to just outright pay college athletes just to play though because most of them will most likely make dumb decisions and use it on stupid things like alcohol because there isn't much they need money for in college especially if they have a scholarship.
Even though this will continue to be highly debated, I don't think that anyone will ever come up with a strong enough case for the NCAA to decide to pay their athletes. They're doing completely fine now with how it is structured and they're making a good profit so I don't see any need for them to change it any time soon. The marginal costs of paying college athletes would just far outweigh the marginal benefits for the NCAA.
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
LeBron James-Led Cavs Have NBA's Most Expensive Tickets - forbes.com
LeBron James-Led Cavs Have NBA's Most Expensive Tickets
During the second half of the season last year, Cleveland Cavaliers' tickets were among the least expensive in the NBA, second only to the Pelicans. Now at the start of this season, Cavs' tickets are the most expensive on the market after they made some huge offseason moves. This goes to show you just how much the NBA is focused around its stars. Also, tickets for your home team will be priced a lot higher when they play teams with players like Derrick Rose or Kevin Durant. Even though the Lakers had a very bad season last year, and are expected to have another sub-par one this year, their tickets are still the second most expensive in the league. Not only is this because the Lakers have Kobe Bryant, but I also feel that it is because it's in Los Angeles and in the Staples Center and the Lakers have such a great tradition.
This article actually demonstrates a lot of what we're learning in class with supply and demand. As the demand for tickets goes up, the price also goes up because the demand curve was shifted. The determinant that causes this shift is a change in consumer tastes. If a team has one or two stars and they are exciting to watch, more people will want to come see the team play so the demand for tickets goes up. But if a team is really bad and has no one that is exciting to watch, not many people are going to want to go to the games so the demand will go down. For example, my own personal preference is that I wouldn't really want to go to a Bucks game so I wouldn't be willing to pay very much for a ticket. On the other hand, if the Cavs played the Sixers I would definitely like to see that game, so I would be willing to pay a lot more for a ticket.
It's incredible to see how much LeBron James can change the price of a ticket. I believe it's reasonable though because any game that LeBron James is playing in, the demand is going to go way up. Who wouldn't want to see arguably the most exciting athlete in the country perform? This article is a great example to portray how the equilibrium shifts when there is a change in demand.
During the second half of the season last year, Cleveland Cavaliers' tickets were among the least expensive in the NBA, second only to the Pelicans. Now at the start of this season, Cavs' tickets are the most expensive on the market after they made some huge offseason moves. This goes to show you just how much the NBA is focused around its stars. Also, tickets for your home team will be priced a lot higher when they play teams with players like Derrick Rose or Kevin Durant. Even though the Lakers had a very bad season last year, and are expected to have another sub-par one this year, their tickets are still the second most expensive in the league. Not only is this because the Lakers have Kobe Bryant, but I also feel that it is because it's in Los Angeles and in the Staples Center and the Lakers have such a great tradition.
This article actually demonstrates a lot of what we're learning in class with supply and demand. As the demand for tickets goes up, the price also goes up because the demand curve was shifted. The determinant that causes this shift is a change in consumer tastes. If a team has one or two stars and they are exciting to watch, more people will want to come see the team play so the demand for tickets goes up. But if a team is really bad and has no one that is exciting to watch, not many people are going to want to go to the games so the demand will go down. For example, my own personal preference is that I wouldn't really want to go to a Bucks game so I wouldn't be willing to pay very much for a ticket. On the other hand, if the Cavs played the Sixers I would definitely like to see that game, so I would be willing to pay a lot more for a ticket.
It's incredible to see how much LeBron James can change the price of a ticket. I believe it's reasonable though because any game that LeBron James is playing in, the demand is going to go way up. Who wouldn't want to see arguably the most exciting athlete in the country perform? This article is a great example to portray how the equilibrium shifts when there is a change in demand.
Sunday, October 5, 2014
Olympic Council of Asia warns India of penalty if it withdraws from some sports - indiatimes.com
Olympic Council of Asia warns India of penalty if it withdraws from some sports
Just like the Olympics, the Asian Games are held every four years. What are the Asian Games? I didn't even know the Asian Games were a thing until I read this article. I had to do some other research to figure out what they were. They are basically the same as the Olympics, except there are some different sports involved and it is only among athletes from all over Asia. There have been 44 different sports that were presented in Asian Games history. The Games for this year actually just ended yesterday, as they went from September 19 to October 4. This article dealt with something that happened before the Games started.
India was warned of a heavy penalty by the Olympic Council of Asia if they withdrew from sending a couple of teams to the Asian Games. They were going to receive a penalty because the team draw had already been completed, and if they were to withdraw, the whole draw would have to be done again. I feel that India should deserve a penalty if they withdrew because they waited until after the team draw was already completed. This penalty could end up being a bad thing for India economically. Not knowing what the penalty will be, it could be something like not allowing India to ever host one of the Asian Games. That could really be a bad thing because if they were able to host the Asian Games one year, that would bring in a lot of money to the businesses of the country and help out the economy a lot. So India has to make an economic choice here. The article doesn't really give a reason for why they are withdrawing some teams but it must help them in some way for the time being. So India can either decide to withdraw the teams and help themselves for a little, and receive a penalty that could possibly hurt them economically pretty bad, or they can send the teams to the Games and possibly help the economy in the future .
I just find it really interesting that I have never heard of the Asian Games. I'm sure a lot of other people haven't heard of them either. It's hard to believe because it's described as the second largest multi-sport event, behind the Olympics.
Just like the Olympics, the Asian Games are held every four years. What are the Asian Games? I didn't even know the Asian Games were a thing until I read this article. I had to do some other research to figure out what they were. They are basically the same as the Olympics, except there are some different sports involved and it is only among athletes from all over Asia. There have been 44 different sports that were presented in Asian Games history. The Games for this year actually just ended yesterday, as they went from September 19 to October 4. This article dealt with something that happened before the Games started.
India was warned of a heavy penalty by the Olympic Council of Asia if they withdrew from sending a couple of teams to the Asian Games. They were going to receive a penalty because the team draw had already been completed, and if they were to withdraw, the whole draw would have to be done again. I feel that India should deserve a penalty if they withdrew because they waited until after the team draw was already completed. This penalty could end up being a bad thing for India economically. Not knowing what the penalty will be, it could be something like not allowing India to ever host one of the Asian Games. That could really be a bad thing because if they were able to host the Asian Games one year, that would bring in a lot of money to the businesses of the country and help out the economy a lot. So India has to make an economic choice here. The article doesn't really give a reason for why they are withdrawing some teams but it must help them in some way for the time being. So India can either decide to withdraw the teams and help themselves for a little, and receive a penalty that could possibly hurt them economically pretty bad, or they can send the teams to the Games and possibly help the economy in the future .
I just find it really interesting that I have never heard of the Asian Games. I'm sure a lot of other people haven't heard of them either. It's hard to believe because it's described as the second largest multi-sport event, behind the Olympics.
After Rough Start To Season, Patriots Tickets Have Dropped 19% On Secondary Market - forbes.com
After Rough Start To Season, Patriots Tickets Have Dropped 19% On Secondary Market
After a tough start to the season, Patriots fans are starting to get a little worried. Who wouldn't be worried after your team barely beats the Oakland Raiders?! The worrisome ways of the fans are shown by the decline in prices of Patriots tickets on the secondary market. For most regular fans of the Patriots, this might sound like a good thing since it will be less to buy a ticket, but it's not a good thing for the team, or for the diehard fans that just want to see their team win and do not care about the price of tickets. Through four weeks of the season, the season average is $292.83, compared to last year's season average of $363.83.
The interesting thing is that a similar occurrence happened in the Boston area during the baseball season. When the season started, Boston Red Sox tickets were one of the most expensive on the secondary market, but as the season progressed and the Red Sox weren't performing well, the average price of tickets dropped 18%. I find it very interesting that both of these things happened in the Boston area. It really says something about the Boston fans. If their team isn't doing well, they won't come out to support the team. This whole situation is kind of like the economic concept: People respond to incentives. In this case, it's not really an incentive that people are responding to, but more of an outcome. If a team is really bad and loses most of their games, people will be less likely to want to see the team play, so the team has to lower the price of their tickets so that people will buy them since they are pretty cheap. On the other hand, if a team is doing really well and is exciting to watch, fans will really want to go out to the stadium to see the team play, so the team is able to raise the prices because fans will be willing to pay more to see their team win. This can even be related to the economic concept of demand. If the demand for an object is really high, customers will be willing to pay more for the object because they really want it.
The Patriots organization better hope the team starts winning some games starting with their Sunday Night game tonight against the Bengals. If they don't, well..... just look at the Red Sox.
After a tough start to the season, Patriots fans are starting to get a little worried. Who wouldn't be worried after your team barely beats the Oakland Raiders?! The worrisome ways of the fans are shown by the decline in prices of Patriots tickets on the secondary market. For most regular fans of the Patriots, this might sound like a good thing since it will be less to buy a ticket, but it's not a good thing for the team, or for the diehard fans that just want to see their team win and do not care about the price of tickets. Through four weeks of the season, the season average is $292.83, compared to last year's season average of $363.83.
The interesting thing is that a similar occurrence happened in the Boston area during the baseball season. When the season started, Boston Red Sox tickets were one of the most expensive on the secondary market, but as the season progressed and the Red Sox weren't performing well, the average price of tickets dropped 18%. I find it very interesting that both of these things happened in the Boston area. It really says something about the Boston fans. If their team isn't doing well, they won't come out to support the team. This whole situation is kind of like the economic concept: People respond to incentives. In this case, it's not really an incentive that people are responding to, but more of an outcome. If a team is really bad and loses most of their games, people will be less likely to want to see the team play, so the team has to lower the price of their tickets so that people will buy them since they are pretty cheap. On the other hand, if a team is doing really well and is exciting to watch, fans will really want to go out to the stadium to see the team play, so the team is able to raise the prices because fans will be willing to pay more to see their team win. This can even be related to the economic concept of demand. If the demand for an object is really high, customers will be willing to pay more for the object because they really want it.
The Patriots organization better hope the team starts winning some games starting with their Sunday Night game tonight against the Bengals. If they don't, well..... just look at the Red Sox.
Thursday, September 18, 2014
How Much Is a Sports Rivalry Worth? - slate.com
How Much Is a Sports Rivalry Worth?
Most people, including me, think of rivalries in sports as a great game to watch with much excitement. That's the main thing most people think of when they hear a sports rivalry. No regular fan ever thinks of the economics of a sports rivalry, and I don't blame them. One of the biggest things a team can do to ensure its economic health, is to have a good rivalry. It may sound ridiculous, but it's true. If you look at the most valuable MLB teams according to Forbes, the top three teams all have a heated rivalry with another team. The Yankees have the Red Sox, the Dodgers have the Giants, and the Cubs have the Cardinals. Another great example of the economic value of sports rivalries is college football. On the weekend of a game between the University of Idaho and Boise State, the game brought $1 million to the Moscow, Idaho economy.
I enjoy a great sports rivalry. A great rivalry consists of teams that are always usually pretty good, so you can always expect a close, hard fought game. I love that rivalries have huge economic value. It only encourages more and more rivalries to be created. Knowing the economic value of a huge rivalry, the NFL or MLB might switch the divisions of teams so that teams closer to each other can be in the same division so there is more of a rivalry. In my opinion, that would be great for every sport and it makes everybody in the situation happy, unless of course the rivalries are left unregulated. If that happens, then the rivalries can get a little overboard and actually do more damage than good. Most times though, sports rivalries are kept regulated and everybody comes out on top in my opinion. The fans are happier because they are seeing better and more exciting games. The teams are happier because athletes always love playing against rivals, and it is better for the economic value of the team. Even the city is happy because the rivalry brings a boost in earnings for businesses during that game or series.
Most people, including me, think of rivalries in sports as a great game to watch with much excitement. That's the main thing most people think of when they hear a sports rivalry. No regular fan ever thinks of the economics of a sports rivalry, and I don't blame them. One of the biggest things a team can do to ensure its economic health, is to have a good rivalry. It may sound ridiculous, but it's true. If you look at the most valuable MLB teams according to Forbes, the top three teams all have a heated rivalry with another team. The Yankees have the Red Sox, the Dodgers have the Giants, and the Cubs have the Cardinals. Another great example of the economic value of sports rivalries is college football. On the weekend of a game between the University of Idaho and Boise State, the game brought $1 million to the Moscow, Idaho economy.
I enjoy a great sports rivalry. A great rivalry consists of teams that are always usually pretty good, so you can always expect a close, hard fought game. I love that rivalries have huge economic value. It only encourages more and more rivalries to be created. Knowing the economic value of a huge rivalry, the NFL or MLB might switch the divisions of teams so that teams closer to each other can be in the same division so there is more of a rivalry. In my opinion, that would be great for every sport and it makes everybody in the situation happy, unless of course the rivalries are left unregulated. If that happens, then the rivalries can get a little overboard and actually do more damage than good. Most times though, sports rivalries are kept regulated and everybody comes out on top in my opinion. The fans are happier because they are seeing better and more exciting games. The teams are happier because athletes always love playing against rivals, and it is better for the economic value of the team. Even the city is happy because the rivalry brings a boost in earnings for businesses during that game or series.
The NFL's Most Valuable Teams - forbes.com
The NFL's Most Valuable Teams
The article from forbes.com does not really have anything to do with the things we have talked about in class so far, but I chose it because it was about football. The article includes a list of all the 32 NFL teams in order from most valuable to least valuable, and it also talks about how the NFL has the highest average team value among all other sports.
I find it incredible how much NFL teams are worth. The most valuable team is the Dallas Cowboys at $3.2 billion and the average NFL team is worth $1.43 billion. That is crazy! The even crazier thing is that average value keeps rising. At $1.43 billion, it is the highest it has been since Forbes started tracking professional football team finances, and it is also 23% more than a year ago. I believe the NFL keeps getting more and more popular each year, and that is why the value of teams keeps increasing.
While this increase in value is tremendous for the owners of NFL teams, I'm not sure if it is good for our overall economy. Personally I think it is ridiculous how much professional athletes get paid. Maybe if professional athletes were paid less, our economy would be a lot better and we could fix some other problems. We could put more money towards public education or anything that needs some help.
With all of the new news in the NFL with Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, I wonder if that will cause the NFL to lose some fans and cause the value of teams to go down. A lot of fans really dislike Roger Goodell and wish he would be fired. If Roger Goodell does not handle the Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson incidents well, that could cause many fans to get angry and maybe even cause them to stop watching football. If that's the case, maybe the average NFL team value will decrease when next year's results come out, which would be something out of the ordinary. I guess we'll have to see how things turn out in the near future and then check the average NFL team value next year.
The article from forbes.com does not really have anything to do with the things we have talked about in class so far, but I chose it because it was about football. The article includes a list of all the 32 NFL teams in order from most valuable to least valuable, and it also talks about how the NFL has the highest average team value among all other sports.
I find it incredible how much NFL teams are worth. The most valuable team is the Dallas Cowboys at $3.2 billion and the average NFL team is worth $1.43 billion. That is crazy! The even crazier thing is that average value keeps rising. At $1.43 billion, it is the highest it has been since Forbes started tracking professional football team finances, and it is also 23% more than a year ago. I believe the NFL keeps getting more and more popular each year, and that is why the value of teams keeps increasing.
While this increase in value is tremendous for the owners of NFL teams, I'm not sure if it is good for our overall economy. Personally I think it is ridiculous how much professional athletes get paid. Maybe if professional athletes were paid less, our economy would be a lot better and we could fix some other problems. We could put more money towards public education or anything that needs some help.
With all of the new news in the NFL with Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson, I wonder if that will cause the NFL to lose some fans and cause the value of teams to go down. A lot of fans really dislike Roger Goodell and wish he would be fired. If Roger Goodell does not handle the Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson incidents well, that could cause many fans to get angry and maybe even cause them to stop watching football. If that's the case, maybe the average NFL team value will decrease when next year's results come out, which would be something out of the ordinary. I guess we'll have to see how things turn out in the near future and then check the average NFL team value next year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)