BC explains its protest vote

The New York Times featured BC and Brad Bates in Monday's article on paying college athletes. As most inferred, Bates and Father Leahy knew the initiative would pass and felt they needed to send a message with their vote. I am all for being a contrarian, but I have a problem with how BC is playing this.

College athletics is headed down a path where things are going to become more professional and more commercial. It is only fair and probably in the best interest of the athletes. BC's leadership is smart. We know they see the big picture, hence the "We clearly wanted people to pause." Who does the "pausing" benefit? The current power brokers (i.e. schools, coaches, admins). It doesn't really benefit the athletes. The oncoming changes are disruptive but inevitable and trying to stop the inevitable is wasted energy.

Instead of trying to maintain the status quo even through protest votes, BC's leadership should decide where they want to be in the new world. It is not an easy decision, but coming up with real answers is more brave and shows more leadership than an "I told you so" vote among college administrators.