OT: Opinion Piece on NCAA Amateurism From Former Miami Lineman and Recent UM Law Grad
A dead horse? Perhaps. Sour grapes/attempted justification? Maybe so. But still an interesting read from a well-educated former college football player whose team is right in the thick of one of the biggest NCAA investigations of all time. Also somewhat of a counter argument/different perspective on Cousins' Gettysburg Address from the B1G media days.
Full disclosure: I went to Miami for undergrad, so...yea, that might explain why I felt the need to post this.
What’s that you say? The rules are the rules? I call b.s.. When the rules are propagated by the very same people they’re designed to benefit, I say the rules must be independently justifiable. What is the justification for saying that AJ Green can’t sell his jersey? That he won’t be an “amateur” anymore? Doesn’t the scholarship itself render him no longer an amateur by any objective definition? Doesn’t the fact that Georgia spent hundreds of millions of dollars advertising itself to AJ Green render him no longer an amateur? Doesn’t he stop being an amateur when UGA promises him that his career at Georgia will net him NFL millions? Doesn’t the fact that millions of dollars change hands thanks to the service he provides make him not an amateur?
August 18th, 2011 at 6:30 PM ^
I have a law degree from the U (it appears the author and I did the opposite, I'm M undergrad) but if this guy professes to be a lawyer his opinion is painfully clouded.
"I call b.s.. When the rules are propagated by the very same people they’re designed to benefit, I say the rules must be independently justifiable."
I call b.s. to you Mr. UM Law grad author. There are lots of laws and the enforcement of laws (speeding for one) that are created by, benefit and are even enforced by the very same jurisdiction. That is often the nature of both rules and laws. I call sour grapes and b.s. on him and anyone who follows this theory. The rules may very well be bullshit and the NCAA equally bullshit (and with some questionable motive) but everyone who wants to participate agrees to the rules and if they don't like them, they don't have to participate. You can't cry about it once you get caught.
LOOK I'm getting a little annoyed with the crap I'm hearing in the media (Rosenberg's article on CNNSI yesterday and a bunch of Jim Rome's garbage on his radio show today in particular) about the NCAA rules being bullshit, amateurism being a sham etc. NO KIDDING!! It is, on some level ridiculous that the schools make millions and the players get none. HOWEVER, to those who say rip back the rules, it would turn college football and basketball into major league baseball with the teams that can shell out the most being the tops most years. I personally don't want to see colleges have any part in that kind of scenario. Essentially what you're saying is that everyone should be like Miami and have a stable of hookers, party houses, cash payments, lavish parties for athletes etc as a way to entice them to play for you. Screw that. That shouldn't be part of college. I'd sooner see football and basketball create a minor league system like baseball and let the ones who can't hack college or don't want to go their own way and stay off campus.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:37 PM ^
I have a hard time following your argument that because speeding laws benefit municipalities or states or whatever, it's the same thing. We live, conceptually at least, in a democratic republic of sorts. The people who make the rules, even the ones that might benefit them, are voted in by the people. If you want to draw parallels here, the major difference is that the players don't get a vote in who makes the rules, only the institutions do. And to say "you don't have to participate", while true, ignores the reality that a lot of kids face. Misguided or not, there are many young poor kids who believe the only way to support their family is to make it in professional sports. If their talents are football related, they really don't have a choice (or a smart choice) other than the NCAA. Could they go play in some other lesser league and then try to make it to the NFL, sure, but let's be serious. Major college programs are essentially the NFL's D-League. If the NFL is where you want to end up, college is your smartest route.
Again, we obviously need to consider the source and recognize when this is being brought up, but you can't act like the NCAA guidelines aren't essentially an adhesion contract.
Also, just want to make clear, even as a MIami fan, I don't excuse ANY of this behavior, if true. It's embarassing for everyone involved and should not be condoned or excused, no matter how flawed the system is.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:05 PM ^
I agree with Angell, not with you. If you don't like the rules, don't play college football. Just because it's the best option, doesn't mean it's your only option.
If you're a top HS football player, you have choices. NCAA is the best option, but it's also the most restrictive with regards to the income you can generate for yourself. In a lot of aspects of life, your best option in the long-term isn't necessarily very beneficial in the short-term. That's the choice you take.
If you're such a hot-shot, spend three years of your life getting nothing but free room and board, and if you do, you'll be set up to make millions later on. Don't like those rules? Go play in Canada or in the USFL or train on your own and see if anyone gives a shit about your jersey or signature. It's a give and take.
Sure, OSU took the money that Pryor brought in. But if it wasn't for OSU, no one would give a shit about Terrelle Pryor anyway.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:44 PM ^
Imagine you're a high school sophomore. You're 15, maybe 16 years old. You live in a house with a single mother and 6 brothers and sisters. You've known you were physically gifted for 3-4 years, and now people are starting to take notice. You start getting letters, calls, texts, facebook messages, visits and such from college coaches of teams you've watched on TV and idolized since you were a little kid. All these coaches are telling you that about how many players they've put in the NFL, and that's truthfully something you already know. They bring you on campus, wine and dine you, show you the life you can lead and you might even get a visit from a nice "hostess".
At this point, you're pretty fired up, but you know your Mom is having trouble supporting herself and think it would be nice to make some money playing professionally before the NFL. You look at the CFL, you look at other leagues, and really do your due dilligence (you're a pretty smart kid and not taken in by all of the glamour of NCAA football). The more research you do, the more you realize that careers in pro football are pretty short, and there's not a ton of money in the other leagues. Also, you realize that the people who play in those other leagues, while less talented than NFL players, are still much bigger than you and you'd probably need a couple years to develop in order to compete. EVERYONE you know tells you to go to college, including your Mom, whose been your only role model.
Calls continue, recruiting analysts talk you up, fans of schools message you on twitter, the momentum of pressure to play college football is a never ending tidal wave, not to mention the fact that it sounds awesome. Now at 17 or 18, do you really think there's ANY chance you're not going to college?
I just think its easy for us to say there's choices when we're not actually put in that scenario. And the majority of people having this big discussion about amateurism and talking from their ivory tower are probably not doing so from the corners of Liberty City or downtown Detroit or anywhere that acknowledges the harsh realities of how few options these kids have, myself included.
And is that what you really want? For the most talented kids to go elsewhere? If all the Terrelle Pryors (i mean this in the most benign way possible - incredibly talented athlete) of the world went elsewhere, the product you'd see on the field wouldn't be making all that money for those schools. You don't see the big donors and TV contracts for FCS football.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^
Just because it's the best choice doesn't mean it's the only choice.
If your single mom is having such hard times, wouldn't she be thrilled that a school is paying for hers son's rent as well as his food? Wouldn't she be thrilled that, whether it be from sports or not, this opportunity will put her son in a much better position to make money than he normally would have had? Even if this young man doesn't make the NFL (and he probably won't) then at worst he'll be a college grad with no student loans, better than I was.
College is the best route, for this kid as well as most of us. It comes with drawbacks - you have less money for that time. I had a friend who became a firefighter when we graduated from high school. I was a broke college student and he was making some decent income working. For four years, he had a lot more money than I did. I didn't compain about the system, I knew I could have chosen a similar path, but college was the best way to get me where I wanted to go so I dealt with being broke for four years.
If I can do it, so can AJ Green and Terrelle Pryor.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:14 PM ^
that deals in packages must be 100% accepted on all levels is troubling. I don't disagree with some of the things you said above, but I hate this concept of "well you signed up for this 1 small aspect, how dare you not just accept it blindly".
August 18th, 2011 at 8:36 PM ^
I paid my own way for college, and have student loans, and believe me when I say I would've done ANYTHING to be able to play college football and would not have complained one bit that I wasn't allowed to get money from boosters. But, in fairness to some of these kids, a good percentage of them couldn't care less about school. They grew up in a neighborhood where education was deemphasized and sometimes even scorned. Play ball, sell drugs, work for minimum wage, these are your main options. A lot of kids would have their applications laughed at and thrown out were they not stud athletes (yes, I recognize that this can be seen as a benefit that's given to them - the opportunity to go to a good school they never otherwise had a chance to get into). But if you've been ushered through awful schools your whole life, do you really think that while involved in football stuff for 30, 40, or 60 hours a week as the author of the article points out will lend itself to catching up to your fellow students and really competing in the classroom? Sure, there's great stories of kids who turn themselves around or get a great education and do great things, but most of em are playing with the deck stacked against them in every class they sit in.
Your argument that you accepted being a broke college student is one I don't understand. Were there people offering you money to help fix your car or pay your phone bill or something that you had to turn down? Of course you didn't complain about the system, the system didn't do anything to limit your opportunities to make money or make millions off your exploits. If you had an unexpected bill or expense, you could go get a part time job. I worked between 30-40 hours a week in school and was able to pay for a cell phone, buy a crappy used car and grab a beer on a Saturday night. What should these kids do if there's an expense they can't cover?
August 18th, 2011 at 10:24 PM ^
That's the trade off. They don't get to make money, because they're getting world class training for free when they really aren't professional level players yet. They money they are generating is paying for their world class facilities, their top of the line coaches and the exposure necessary to be wanted by a pro franchise. If they have an expense (other than, of course, housing and food) then they have do without. If they turn out to be professional-worthy, they'll get to buy whatever they want at that time.
Personally, I'm in favor of lowering the number of years out of high school a kid needs to be to go pro. If a kid like Clarett wants to throw his college years away because he thinks he's pro ready, sounds good. That way, more kids who wanted to be there would get college scholarships. But while you're in college, you play by the rules there or you leave. Why is that such a problem?
August 18th, 2011 at 11:48 PM ^
The money they are generating is also paying for non-revenue sports and ridiculous salaries for ADs and people like Emmert. This is BIG business for everyone that's not risking injury day in and day out. Oh yea, part of that "trade-off"? Your scholarship isn't guaranteed.
<br>
<br>Doesn't it seem a little bit out of wack that money people make off this sport has been skyrocketing while the value of an undergraduate degree falls, but everyone still thinks it's a fair deal?
August 18th, 2011 at 10:54 PM ^
Of course they *could* do it, but why would they choose to? Put yourself in their shoes; you have two choices: play by the NCAA's rules or violate them, make yourself some money and run the risk of incurring punishment.
Now, if these were the rules of some governing body with the power to forcibly imprison you, it would make for a tough choice depending on how badly you needed the money. When you consider that the majority of the punishment for your actions will be felt by the institution, who you can strongly argue, is using you, the idea of violating the absurd rules of the world's largest agglomeration of hypocritical morons seems palatable.
For the kids who are stars, asking them to follow the NCAA's toothless (for the player receiving benefits anyway) rules is requesting altruism to the point of insanity.
August 18th, 2011 at 11:08 PM ^
It sounds to me that your biggest problem is with the enforcement, and if that's the case then I agree with you. I think there should be better enforcement of the rules, and more accountability if they're broken, for both the players and the institutions, who would then help make sure these people weren't around the players.
Now, Terrelle Pryor will probably argue that getting caught has real consequences. He lost a year of college football which would have made him a better player and likely upped his draft stock. He has also alienated himself from a fanbase that otherwise would have loved him and bought his jersey in the NFL. Even the other Tat 5 guys are losing a big chunk of the season to show off their talents.
August 19th, 2011 at 7:22 AM ^
That's pretty much it. I'm not saying the players have nothing to lose, but when even a mental defective like TP can see that following the rules is a greater punishment than the actual punishment, well, it's obvious what's going to happen.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^
August 18th, 2011 at 8:40 PM ^
What's your point?
August 18th, 2011 at 9:01 PM ^
That if the adults want to keep it an amateur sport -- as they should -- they ought not to be whoring out their programs to every conceivable revenue source, and paying a bunch of those revenues to themselves.
There should be no mystery about these revenue sources and the insatiable thirst to hit the teat of each of them. Just look at Dave Brandon, how he talks, his background, what he values -- and look at what's happened since around 1990:
Corporate logos on the jerseys
Luxury boxes in college stadiums
Conference shopping
Coaches being paid 10 times plus the best professors on campus
Half or more of the people in the stadium wearing jerseys, as opposed to a small handful
Games played on ridiculous days at ridiculous hours, all for TV
Ticket price rises far in excess of inflation
... and on and on.
With that as backdrop of course a lot more kids are going to see through the con. That's bad enough, but what we're seeing now are wide swaths of civilized and intelligent media and blogosphere voices giving in; using the con and it's seemingly never-ending growth to justify changing the entire meaning of college football. College football is and has never been perfect, but it has always been scholarship students playing for the school they attend. Make the players employees of Ponzi schemers and leeches and lowlifes with no connection to the schools -- with the best players "earning" more than the run-of-the-mill guys -- and you have an entirely different beast. We can't give in and let it become that, and I can't believe intelligent people are seriously advocating that.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:41 PM ^
I have a really hard time accepting the "These kids are poor" and "These kids didn't have the advantages you had" argument. I mean, if a kid is taking a couple bucks under the table to pay for some milk or bread, I still think its cheating, but I'm not going to demand loss of scholarships or that the kid be removed from the team.
I have a huge problem when these arguments come out in situation when kids are stealing equipment from the school that is paying for their education and trading it for tats. Also, when kids are knowingly getting hooked up with prostitutes and going to strip clubs and getting drunk on someone elses dime. They aren't doing that b/c they are poor. They are doing that b/c they don't have a proper moral compass and they're OK with breaking rules (and in many cases laws).
If you want to say their background is the reason they don't know wrong from right, I'm not even going to touch that one. You're living in a world that isn't real if you think somehow the NCAA and amateurism rules are going to change how that turns out.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:53 PM ^
No, trust me, and I should have made myself clear, if the particularly heinous things talked about in the yahoo article prove true, there's no defending it. And agreed, no change in NCAA rules will change that.
Truthfully, I was arguing in a somewhat hyphothetical and (advantageous to my points) clean world, where a kid needs a few bucks to make ends meet, or isn't going to get indignant if someone wants to buy him a beer at the bar. Agreed that the current allegations are a much bigger and worse scale, and that if they want prostitutes and whatnot, that's a different story.
August 18th, 2011 at 11:45 PM ^
I'm guessing you file a lot of Motions to Exceed Page Limits.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:46 PM ^
I like it a lot. But there is something vaugely socialist about telling somebody, "You can't earn more than X amount with your skills". There may be other options, but in a capitalist environment, anyone in ANY position should be able to earn as much as they can manage from that position without breaking laws.
I think the quesiton becomes, is an NCAA rule a "law"? Does selling your jersey amount to embezelment?
August 18th, 2011 at 7:11 PM ^
When kids sign up to accept a college scholarship in return for playing a sport, they know the rules and agree to follow them. In return, they get a college scholarship worth approximately $200,000 plus first tier coaching and equipment intended to optimize their ability to excel at their chosen sport plus the opportunity to hone their skills by playing against others their age who are also trying to hone their skills to an extent sufficient to enable them to join the professional ranks in their chosen sport. Of those who go to college for four years and graduate (or at least get close), about 1 in 10 will actually make it onto a pro team, and 9 out of 10 will wind up working for a living in some other field. Statistics say they will tend to do above average in most fields, in part because of what they learn about team play and in part because of connections they make while playing for a college team.
If they had a better option, many would take it.
If the colleges and the NCAA can't get it straightened out any other way, I would just as soon see the pro sports start minor leagues for kids out of high school who want to take a shot at being a pro (probably most would get signed for very little money) and let the colleges go back to being for the students.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:48 PM ^
Very well said.
I listed to a lot of talk radio the last couple days about this, and a lot of people discount the tuition or education part of it, saying a lot of these kids don't really care about a $200,000 education. Fine. Even removing the degree from the equation, the NCAA gives kids free near-professional coaching, pro quality facilities, near-pro competition, near-pro (sometimes higher) exposure, and so on. If you don't care about the degree, that's fine, but you won't find all that other stuff anywhere outside of the NFL. Just like every other part of life, you take the good with the bad or you don't take it at all.
August 18th, 2011 at 11:31 PM ^
And honestly, it doesn't matter if they care about the education or not. It's a tangible benefit that they're receiving, and one that a lot of kids would die for. So what if they don't care about it? That doesn't make it any less valuable.
August 18th, 2011 at 9:23 PM ^
I'm just not understanding how all these commentators don't understand rules and why they exist. It truly does not matter what the BCS schools rake in for bowl games or how much a jersey goes for or how much a ticket costs. You take your scholarship and all benefits noted above, you sign the dotted line, and you follow the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't play. Just need a governing body to enforce the rules, whatever they are, consistently, in order for the fans to feel they are watching something that isn't fixed.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:21 PM ^
August 19th, 2011 at 12:10 AM ^
I really hate slippery slope arguments. They make it sound like any change you make will just spiral out of control and are a good way of keeping a status quo even if it's broken. Cowherd's a blowhard, but regardless, what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? (Ignoring the heinous criminal activities alleged), taking money from a booster for a dinner or drinks or a phone bill or just some spending money certainly can't be equated to systematically cheating hardworking Americans out of millions of dollars. I'm not saying that changing the system will solve the problem completely, but all of the issues certainly highlight some of the hypocrisy in the NCAA. Do you really have a problem with Emmert or Dave Brandon or any number of overpaid people earning a couple hundred thousand dollars less and giving that to a struggling kid? And if you want to talk about greed, how bout the Texas network, or BigTen Network or a $10 million Adidas contract?
August 19th, 2011 at 1:13 AM ^
August 19th, 2011 at 2:40 AM ^
We're arguing about different things. I don't care how Kellen Winslow gets a hooker, it's illegal and more importantly, morally wrong. That's not what this is about (the blog referenced or my argument). These are kids. When most kids, sign their letter of intent, they need a parent or guardian to co-sign because they're not legally old enough to enter into a contract. If you're a poor kid in an awful neighborhood who never had a teacher who cared or had the resources to really educate you and you're only discernable skill is your athletic prowess, what are all the "choices" you have? You see an avenue that affords you an opportunity to be a professional athlete and you take it. Then, you see all the jerseys and t-shirts and memorabilia being sold and the private jet your AD flys around in and the nice rolex your coach wears and the beautiful ivory tower from which the NCAA president reigns down judgment on you, and the numbers start to add up.
If these kids aren't being exploited, then tell me how the number 1 overall pick in the NFL draft can go from making, let's say, 50 or 60 grand a year from his school as a junior to tens of millions not more than 6 months after that season ends? Did his skill set or value or the money he brings in to people above him change 1000x fold in the blink of an eye?
August 18th, 2011 at 6:20 PM ^
... I still think there are rules, and rules need to be enforced. If the system is broken, fix the system. Don't excuse those who blatantly cheat it.
Hopefully what comes out of this is a more equitable distribution of the benefits, but so long as the NCAA is self-regulating, I'm fairly certain that a bunch of really old already affluent dudes will continue reaping huge sums of money off the backs of typically really poor young dudes.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:46 PM ^
There is a discussion to be had about the NCAA and amateurism for sure. I find it incredibly disingenuous when people come out of the woodwork to make said argument right when their school gets busted. They broke the rules. They took the scholarship and joined the team under the pretenses that they would follow them. Other people are following the rules and lose games b/c they decide to follow the rules. This has nothing to do with NCAA amateurism.
This Miami thing has to do with a rich asshole with no friends that made his life about a bunch of college kids and a bunch of greedy college kids that decided they were above the rules they signed on to.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:24 PM ^
I will say the guy makes some good points. But my problem with this piece is he offers no solutions or alternatives. Is he a proponent of throwing out all the rules and letting college football revert to the Wild West? Or would he want the Federal Government to take over rule making and enforcement? I think not. Anyone can take potshots at the current system, especially when their program is the one on the hot seat. As imperfect as the system is, it's still a system and everyone has to live by its rules - even Miami.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^
The problem is that they aren't enforced with the level of prejudice necessary for them to be very effective. Part of me feels like the NCAA should start dishing out a few death penalties to schools and/or players. It sucks because the fault should really fall on the fucking street agents but they are untouchable.If people really cared about this issue they would lobby for laws to be passed making the transfer of improper benefits to recruits a felony.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:24 PM ^
The author of the opinion piece should argue that golf needs to change its rules, too. Amateur golfers are unable to win the type of money that professional golfers are able to win.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:50 PM ^
Amateurism in golf is and was an elitist concept. Amateur golfers used to choose to remain amateurs because it was a status symbol not to need prize money. If a golfer is an amateur nowadays it is probably only due to ncaa bylawys, so they can't get paid.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:26 PM ^
This is, hands down, the best piece against shamateurism I have ever read. I would love to see him argue it in front of a grand jury in an antitrust suit someday.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:45 PM ^
You said shamateurism.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:27 PM ^
This sort of summed up the whole argument:
"Adam: No truer words have been spoken! I hope the NCAA has the intelligents to comprehend it! GO CANES!!!!"
Yeah, not so much "intelligents" here. This is basically condoning the "if you want to win, you must cheat" mindset, and I find it unfortunate that his time at Miami made him this cynical and it is even troubling that he more or less said that even if he knew something was wrong, he wouldn't point it out.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:27 PM ^
Double post.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:30 PM ^
I went to law school with this guy and he's a pretty weird dude. FWIW, I'm not even sure he played a down at Miami, but managed to show everyone his ring from whatever bowl he "played" in.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:48 PM ^
His word choice isn't what I'd expect from a lawya, it's pretty harsh.
That said, he makes a lot of really good, albeit obvious, points. Does accepting a scholarship in exchange for playing football make someone not an amateur? Sounds right to me.
Sorry about the formatting.
am·a·teur
August 18th, 2011 at 7:31 PM ^
The NCAA isn't bound to any dictionary definition of the term amateur, especially when dictionaries vary in their interpretations. Here's a little different version from Merriam-Webster, the only source I checked.
1: devotee, admirer2: one who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession
3: one lacking in experience and competence in an art or science
#2 is the relevant one and I think the NCAA is reasonably consistent in following that meaning of amateur. I'll point out their limitations on practice time and scholastic requirements. Further, no one is arguing that these kids are being paid like professionals.
August 19th, 2011 at 12:14 AM ^
Of course they can self-servingly tailor the definition to what they want it to be. And people aren't arguing they're paid like professionals? Most people who think the system is A-OK right now point to the "200k" they're getting in scholarships and room and board.
August 18th, 2011 at 8:03 PM ^
I for one find it slightly distasteful for you to seemingly look down on him for having never played a down. He was on a big time college football team, and competed with the gets that actually played every single day, and went through the same workouts. He deserves to be proud of his accomplishments and "show everyone his ring" if he would like to. (Not saying he wasn't a duesche or whatever, obviously never knew him like you did, just defending his right to be slightly boastful and proud of his accomplishment of simlpy being on the team at Miami.)
August 18th, 2011 at 8:08 PM ^
Duesche? Is that German?
August 18th, 2011 at 6:31 PM ^
Can somebody start a new post for me... I don't have the points to do it.
http://heavenisabuffet.wordpress.com/2011/08/18/quality-vs-quantity-and-quality/?sct=hp_bf1_a5
Zingerman's Vs. Maize & Blue article on si.com.
Also, if you can give me some points so I can avoid this in teh future I would appreciate it.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:48 PM ^
Doesn’t the fact that Georgia spent hundreds of millions of dollars advertising itself to AJ Green render him no longer an amateur?
Somehow I doubt UM law is teaching their students that throwing in insane statements makes their arguments more compelling.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:55 PM ^
I'm curious to know if he always felt this way, or just had an epiphany when his alma mater got caught red-handed.
I think the NCAA is in a difficult position, and a lot of people don't try to look at things from its perspective. The rules are there to ensure as much competitive balance as possible. The problem with allowing players to sell their own jerseys is that you'd probably see rich boosters offer massively above-market prices for them (and they'd promise the same to recruits), and schools without said rich boosters couldn't compete with that. By making this illegal, the NCAA is nipping one competitive-balance issue in the bud.
The real "bad guy" isn't the NCAA, it's the NFL for refusing to create a real minor league system. If a guy doesn't want to go to college to play professional sports, he shouldn't have to, but the current NFL system basically requires him to.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:04 PM ^
I think the rules are there because they're what the schools want. I don't think it's about competitive balance so much as a real belief by university presidents in the ideal of a well-rounded education and the value of athletics as well as a sincere desire to not have to race the 1981 SMU boosters to the bottom because it ends about where Miami would be in a year if Nevin Shapiro hadn't run out of money.
August 18th, 2011 at 6:56 PM ^
That means that they must follow the rules. If it's true as you say that for such young athletes that they hold the belief that professional football is the only avenue for financial success, then why wouldn't they do everything in their power to maintain their own good standing within that avenue? Whenever a major program like this gets caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar many cry foul on the rules which they broke. But the bottom line is that the NCAA holds the power and thus makes the rules.
And honestly, unfair situations like this can be found in many places unrelated to football or sports at all.
For example you might have a problem with the cost of license plate tag renewel, well, you don't have to drive if you don't like it, except you actually do have to drive to realistically live in America with few exceptions. Does this mean that we should blow up the DMV (legally speaking?) No, we accept that although some mandates passed by the DMV are bullshit they basically hold all the power and we as drivers have to deal with it.
August 18th, 2011 at 7:05 PM ^
I actually happened to reread Coach Schembechler's autobiography (co-wrote with Mitch Albom) about a week ago... in which, in the Straight Talk section in the back, he details everything that anyone needs to know about the NCAA and amateurism.
First, he makes the point that football, and to a lesser degree basketball, pay the bills for the entire athletic department. They drive ticket and merchandise sales as well as television revenue.
Second, he makes the point that the revenue generated from football is, again, actually paying for the other departments to issue scholarships and run their own programs. The university is not a corporation attempting to make a profit that will end up being disbersed to the shareholders. It is in fact shuttling money earned from football to another athletic department.
And finally he states the common position that a college education ought to be enough compensation for the opportunity to play football at the collegiate level.
Bo knew. And to be honest, the situation hasn't changed that much from a little over twenty years ago when he wrote the book. Unlike the NFL, it really isn't true that college football is a business or at least that it has to be. I'm paraphrasing the section briefly and perhaps poorly (on vacation and I don't have it in front of me) but I honestly believe strict enforcement of the rules by the NCAA and adjustments to remove some of the more arcane standards is the best approach.