First off, does anyone seriously believe at LEAST 96% of NCAA players will no longer get an education and play a sport? Maybe some that graduated from the same school as Remy believe him, but his statement hardly passes the smell test. An equivalent statement is "We want to withhold earnings of some student athletes at a rate of 96% and spend it as we deem appropriate".
If it's so beneficial to have college sports available, and I'm not saying it isn't, then everyone should pay for it, not just a few in the minority. Look at this issue from your own vantage point. How receptive are you towards losing 90% of your income to pay for someone else's recreational activities?
If you don't like the idea of keeping only 10 cents of every dollar you earn, how can you claim it's appropriate for someone else? This isn't any different than trying to justify the return of a 91% top tax rate
If you're not willing to pay a 91% tax rate on your earnings, you have no business advocating someone else should. It gets worse though, athletes injured while playing can't expect much more than a "too bad, so sad" note from the school. Athletes that may have previously brought in millions of dollars to their alma mater are on their own for future medical expenses and limitations.
Schools take as much as they can and let the athletes fend for themselves with head injuries, broken bones, back/joint pain, and other medical issues. The "free" education doesn't sound so free when you walk with a limp for the rest of your life.
For most of the athletes, their career in school is their only chance to reap the rewards of their efforts. They shouldn't be denied the opportunity to receive what they can, especially when everyone else already is.
At the time of publication the author held no positions in any of the stocks mentioned.
This article is commentary by an independent contributor, separate from TheStreet's regular news coverage.