To the editor:

If the NCAA, sports fans and politicians want to help college athletes, aren’t they taking the wrong approach by allowing them to receive money for endorsements? That will certainly enrich a few stars and perhaps keep them in college longer, to their benefit. But what about the other 99% of athletes who put in the same hours of practice, travel and competition, but will benefit not at all from this program? The same few that will get the endorsements, mostly males in two sports, are the ones who stand to make millions in the future from professional contracts — and more endorsements. If we really think more than tuition, room, board, tutors, etc., is needed to benefit student athletes and their institutions, why not try to help all the student-athletes, rather than a select few? Are the Travis Relefords, Tyrel Reeds and Terry Nooners any less deserving than the Josh Jacksons and Andrew Wigginses?

Is there is a very dark side to this impetus? Is it primarily a callous attempt to keep the stars performing in college longer to spice up the college game, enhance the established ‘elite’ programs and earn more money for the NCAA?

Paul Enos,

Lawrence