NCAA Slams 'Bama for Stuff That Doesn't Matter

"NCAA rules permit institutions to provide required course-related books to student-athletes authorized to receive a book loan as part of their athletics grant-in-aid. Big Ten rules require institutions to provide the use (e.g., loan) rather than the actual cost of required course-related books. Michigan policy requires student-athletes to return their books from the prior academic term before they may receive their book loan for a new term. Student-athletes who fail to return their books in a timely manner will incur a charge on their student account in the amount of the market value of the books that were not returned."

http://www.mgoblue.com/uploadedFiles/Sections/Compliance/Articles/compli... about pg 125

Alabama knowingly used a system that allowed the athletes to cheat.

Looked around -- not too hard, but scrolled through about 5 pages of topics, and didn't see. Sorry for the double-up.

Not every student athlete is completely insulated from the school they attend.

Thousands of recruits matriculate to universities every year with scholarships -- how many of these men will ever make their careers in football? Coaches will tell Top 250 recruits that they will prepare them for the NFL, but even for them the chances are slim of making their way in the world through football. That's including Arena, Canadian, European, etc., leagues.

As far as the participants are concerned, college sports are the best preparatory leagues out there. You should see how much shit minor league baseball players and hockey players are put through. While playing for nobody. Knowing that if one teammate gets too hot he could get plucked any moment. And if you burn out, you're left with...what?

If you win a league championship in the woods...

The NFL is the noble lie told to college recruits to get them to come to a lot of these schools. But the NCAA knows that its true value, the quid pro quo with these non-pros, comes from the fact that they can provide a free education to fall back on.

A typical freshman athlete, when he signs his NCAA papers, is at a weakened negotiating position. In general, he has a 20 percent chance of playing pro football beyond college. He has a 10 percent chance of playing pro football long enough to make enough money to make a difference in his life. He has a 5 percent chance of making pro football his main career. He has a less than 1 percent chance of being an NFL regular, and less than that of being a star.

The NCAA provides an education to all of these failures using the value generated by the successes, and their brands and programs. That's their main payment to the athletes: a college education for all of them, regardless of what happens on the football field. Those who won't need it are the lucky few who will make their way in football. Those who do are the unlucky majority. That is fair. That's their business model.

The NCAA should keep that in mind when coming down on a player for getting wedding gifts over $75, or a program whose athletes used their scholarships for more than their intended purpose. Dogmatism is as sure a sign as any that someone hasn't thought through their own beliefs. The NCAA should be able to tell what business opportunities for their athletes don't compromise the mission, or at the very least figure out how to use the value of the players to their benefit.

We recently hashed out the use of their likenesses on EA Sports' NCAA Football series. That's another perfect example of the NCAA not getting it. There's value here, an opportunity to sell not just the game's stars but to capitalize on all of them. The athletes would be overwhelmingly in favor of having their names used along with their faces. So why try to skim legality to use their likenesses without license? License the whole thing, and use the revenue to provide continuing education for the most deserving athletes or something.

THE VEIL OF IGNORANCE

As for commercials and such, understand that it would give certain schools an unfair advantage. Think about it: if you could make money by appearing in advertisements, why go to any school outside of Los Angeles? Think USC is a powerhouse now, wait until signing an L.O.I. with Pete Carroll comes with an automatic $20,000 for commercial appearances in the place where they film 90 percent of commercials.

And where do you draw the line? Imagine if a car dealership in Columbus could pay Terrelle Pryor to hang around and shake hands with potential customers. Imagine the kind of business that NYPD could do if Tate Forcier was behind the counter making your Calzone. Imagine how hard it would be for these guys to make grades when every business in town is offering up hundreds or thousands of dollars to come do this, sign that, stand for this, etc.

Imagine trying to recruit against a school that could provide all these instant financial incentives.

The answer is for the NCAA to simply control all of it, and to split the funds equally among every student athlete. It will never be enough to make a difference to one athlete personally. Except there's this: those who don't have a future in football become the primary beneficiaries of the few extra dollars (figure it ends up being about $400 per athlete per annum, which isn't really all that much); but those who do have a future as pro football players -- the guys actually doing the commercials -- would benefit from endorsement experience.

Is it fair that, say, a Reggie Bush who is offered $2 million to sponsor a new shoe, only sees a few hundred of it? Well, go back to the beginning, when he signed his NCAA Contract, when even a young high school "stud" like him had a better chance of not making it than becoming his generation's brightest college football star. This is called the "veil of ignorance." That's how I justify the NCAA doling out the dough it makes on its athletes, rather than letting the market dictate.

The point is, then, that the NCAA has lost sight of its mission. They don't need to stick to this dogma of "amateur" versus "professional." Rather, they're in a unique position to capitalize on their brand and share that with their employees. Today, it's overreacting to books. What will be the next wedge? How hypocritical can they be before we witness the first-ever college football players' strike?