The NCAA and the $$$

The NCAA's actions are becoming more and more ridiculous and inconsistent, and they only make sense if you assume the NCAA only cares about the $$$. Three recent and high-profile NCAA disciplinary actions have brought this fact into sharp clarity. The three players in question are Reggie Bush, Cam Newton, and Terrelle Pryor et al.

The NCAA threw the book at USC, and in so doing punished everyone but those who broke the rules. They cut scholarships, stripped the team of wins, and allowed players to transfer without penalties because years ago Reggie Bush (and moreso his parents) were hooked up financially in defiance of NCAA rules. Cam Newton's father shopped his son around for hundreds of thousands of dollars, which should be THE cardinal sin of amateurism if there is one, and Cam Newton was let more or less off the hook. Why? The NCAA thought there wasn't enough evidence (at the time) that Cam Newton knew or was involved. This not only stretches credibility, but it seems to be in flagrant contradiction of the NCAA's own written rules, which say in so many words that the parent and the student-athlete are one and the same.

Why are these two cases treated differently? The only reason I can think of is that Cam Newton is in the process of generating lots of buzz and making other people lots of money, while USC is a dynasty seemingly in decline. Notably, the NCAA did not declare the Cam Newton case closed and the investigation is ostensibly ongoing. Why punish Newton now when he's making the NCAA money? Why punish Newton now when you can whip your indentured servants into line later, punishing whatever innocent third parties are hanging around after Newton bolts for the NFL? The Newton decision only makes sense as a decision to protect post-season revenue, not as a decision to protect fairness, sportsmanship, or the principle of amateurism.

The recent Terrelle Pryor decision (surprise surprise) has the same stink all over it. Pryor and some of his teammates are in trouble for selling some of their Ohio State paraphernalia. The NCAA is suspending them for 5 games at the beginning of next season, but not for the upcoming Sugar Bowl. The NCAA's stated rationale is that the players were not adequately informed about the rules, but what does this have to do with the Sugar Bowl? Isn't this a reason for non- or minimal punishment? The decision makes sense only as a decision to protect post-season revenue.

I could be wrong about the $$$ and the role it plays, but its undeniable that the NCAA's decisions are increasingly inconsistent and difficult to justify.

Oddball Full-Time Jobs

I have been musing recently about a few unusual things one might be able to do for a living. I have a prepared a short list, along with some comments about feasibility, etc. Many of these are odd-jobs that people typically do in small doses for extra money, but that could conceivably be taken on in sufficient quantity to provide decent full-time work.

Given in no particular order...

Psych. Department Guinea Pig:

Psychology departments need lots of human subjects for experiments of various sorts. To bring in these subjects they typically pay around $20 per hour (this number is based on Wash. U and University of Michigan). If one were able to find these opportunities for 40 hours of the week, this would translate into an income of about $40k per year. Being a full-time psych. guinea pig would have some perks. There definitely wouldn't be any stress or pressure while at work, as your employer would record your successes and failure with equal scientific detachment. Being depressed, insomniac, addicted to drugs, neurotic, etc. would all become career boons, as they would qualify you for more studies.

The real difficulty of this career would be finding enough work. I think working one university aggressively, it might be possible to get 10+ hours a week consistently. In an area with many universities close together (Boston, New York, SF Bay Area, etc.) working full-time might be possible. These areas typically have high costs of living that might or might not be compensated by better psych study payouts than the ones I have personally seen.

Sports Ticket Arbitrage:

On a few of occasions I have bought and sold college football tickets secondhand, usually via Facebook or Craigslist. My impression is that the ticket resale market is a long long way from anything one could call efficient. There is almost always a huge spread in listed prices for tickets of very similar qualities, and many buyers and sellers seem oblivious to opportunities for a better deal. I have the impression that one could consistently make money buy purchasing tickets priced too cheaply and then reselling them at a markup.

This plan differs from scalping in that it would not require any on the street sales job. Tickets can be advertised online, most deals would go down long before the game, and buyers are generally willing to meet you wherever. Assuming the right buyers and sellers can be found on the internet, this job boils down to hanging in a coffee shop downtown and collecting money from strangers a couple of hours per day.

Doing this well would require knowing at what prices to buy and sell, and I am not sure how difficult or easy this may be. Listed prices for tickets are so widely spread as to suggest that it is easy, but I do not know for sure what the relationship between list and eventual sale prices is. I dabbled once in the past and it was pretty easy to turn a $20 profit on a ticket. However, once is not a very large sample. The difficulty is compounded by the caprices of sports: if the team does well, ticket prices go up, if the team does poorly, ticket prices go down, etc. If one could predict these things perfectly, one could simply make the money gambling, so ticket arbitrage may not always be a reliable way to make money.

The biggest difficulty would be to buy and sell tickets in sufficiently large volume. Doing a few profitable deals a week seems doable, but I don't know if its possible to find more than this. Everything would be easier if you attempted this scheme in an area with a dense interest in the sport(s) in question.

StubHub is really already executing this plan, even though they present themselves as an intermediary rather than a middle man.

Math/Science Tutoring:

I know from personal experience that calculus tutors can make $30-60 per hour in Ann Arbor, and I have heard and believed stories that rates are substantially higher elsewhere (most notably in New York City). If one were to tutor full-time, this translates into an income of $60-120k per year.

Obviously, one would want to attempt this scheme in an area with a high density of students. During peak periods (around the time when the local colleges have midterms or finals), if one advertised and marketed aggressively, one might be able to round up 60 hours of tutoring a week or more. I am not sure how much work would be available the rest of the year, and summers would be particularly lean. The 60-120k numbers are almost certainly not attainable, but it might be possible to get enough hours to make 30-60k.