quote:
VERY few schools have athelete admission standards higher than the NCAA minimum. That means most schools are taking under-qualified athletes (compared to their normal student population), which also means this particular "stereotype" is probably pretty accurate.

Just because the minimum standards for athletes is lower than for regular students doesn't mean all or even most athletes are towing that line. The vast majority have pretty normal high school gpa's and test scores. And those who do toe that line usually come from underfunded or rural/urban schools that can't adequately prepare them for college, athlete or not. Most academic service programs at most colleges seek to and do a good job of bringing those particular students up to speed.

quote:
lso many schools have majors that are basically made for athletes, whether that is some sort of general degree on some sort of specialized "sports management" scam. So instead of deploying an army of tutors they funnel these kids into degree programs with little real-world value and which deliver a fraction of a normal college education. Where is the indignation over that?

No, most schools have majors that are made for any student admitted to the university to pick and choose to take in pursuance of their degree. As useless as a Sociology or Housing degree may sound, it does serve some use and many students - not just athletes - will graduate with a degree in that major and go on to grad school or work or whatever. THAT issue isn't an athletics one; it's a commercialization of college undergraduate degrees issue.

quote:
The NCAA is already a very weak organization- if they couldn't bust Miami they can't hammer UNC.

The NCAA is weak because they choose to be weak in the interest of adhering to arcane rules and in making money. They couldn't bust Miami because one of their investigators got overzealous and hired an attorney to subpoena Shapiro and others. NCAA dismissed all findings prior to that point and started over which resulted in next to nothing.

quote:
The amatuar nature of college football is already dead

Well, yeah. But that doesn't mean college athletics has to be. College football/basketball/baseball started out with Harvard and Princeton and Yale all paying old alumni and people that didn't ever attend the school to come play for their teams. The payments didn't stop until Football was reformed in the early 1900s and the NCAA was later established. Amateurism is an arcane and inherently unfair ideal that was meant to preserve a sort of university hierarchy that suited the time back then but, obviously, has been far outgrown. College athletics can exist without it, but the integrity of the educational experience has to be upheld same as the rules on the field or court.