Semi-OT: Article on the Business of College Athletics Featuring Some Mention of Michigan (Al Washington, Dan Enos)

Submitted by UMFanatic96 on January 9th, 2019 at 11:36 AM

As a person interested in the business of sports, especially sponsorship, I read a lot of blogs and articles relating to such. I came across this article from this morning about college athletics. It talks about the difference between coaches and student-athletes and mentions the recent happenings with some Michigan coaches.

It's an interesting read and sparks the discussion on if college athletes should be able to sign endorsement deals and earn money off of their likeness. 

LINK: https://trak.io/blog/the-sponsoring-of-college-athletes

In my opinion, I think the gap between what coaches can do and what the student-athletes can do is way too large. I wouldn't mind athletes being able to go out and earn some money for their own likeness. What do you think? 

Eli

January 9th, 2019 at 11:38 AM ^

Don’t care as long as NCAA Football video game comes back. It is a crime that it’s gone. EA has lost millions of dollars. Someone step up and get this game back. 

Jota09

January 9th, 2019 at 12:42 PM ^

Sadly, EA wanted to do just that when they first started making the game.  NCAA wouldn't let them.  I'm sure they always knew this would come back and bite them.  Part of me wonders if there is some animosity towards the NCAA now from EA for forcing them to not get likeness deals with the players when they could have and not end up paying much more later (maybe, I don't really know that but I would think it to be true).

Blue in Paradise

January 9th, 2019 at 12:07 PM ^

Image Rights 

I don't understand how anybody can be against college athletes getting to profit from their image rights.  It is a right that literally every single U.S. citizen has (except for NCAA athletes).  I would love for someone to think of another category of Americans that are not able to sell their image rights.  I literally can't think of one person.  Even politicians (where there can be a conflict of interest) have this right.

Also, where do random people get off putting their hands in the pocket of Tua or Trevor Lawrence?  If a car dealership in Birmingham wants to put Tua in his commercial, why is that anyone's business other than Tua and the owner of the dealership?  And I honestly don't get this argument where a bunch of people say that it will open Pandora's box?  There is a well established system of laws and regulations that govern image right contract law.  I fail to see why college athletes should fall outside of this law.

nickelsarcade

January 9th, 2019 at 12:21 PM ^

I appreciate this perspective and in many ways agree with you. With that being said, I don't think its totally correct to say these players can't profit off of their likeness. Indeed, if Tua stopped playing for UA today, he could sign as many endorsement deals as he wanted. While he is affiliated with the team and NCAA, however, he has certain heightened restrictions that do not carry over to the general public. A good example is drug testing in sports -- a lot of "banned" substances in professional sports league are perfectly legal for the public to consume. Once you join the team, you are consenting to a broader regulatory regime. I can't do a lot of things normal people can do because of my job -- I guess its part of the deal. 

As to the broader point, I guess the question is whether the "feel" of the collegiate game would change when certain athletes were cashing million dollar paychecks. And, at the point they are paid, why even affiliate them with a University? What would make Tua an Alabama player if he was getting 10M a year to do it? At that point, why  not just create a AAA type league? 

I think there are reasonable responses to these arguments (which has basically been the NCAA's position in the player pay lawsuits) but I think the NCAA's position also isn't entirely unreasonable. It's a difficult issue IMO. 

UMFanatic96

January 9th, 2019 at 12:41 PM ^

Regarding your point about the "heightened restrictions" of the NCAA and that Tua could sign endorsement deals if he stopped playing for Bama...

But does he really have the ability to stop playing for Bama and still make it to the NFL (which is the ultimate goal of all big-time college football players)? The NFL requires for anybody to be draft eligible, you have to graduate from your college or be approved by the NFL if you are three years removed from high school.

If Tua or any player decided to stop playing for their college team, sure they could try and go to the NFL once they are three years removed from high school. But how likely is it that any player who didn't play for at least three years at their college would get drafted? 

In this way, college athletes are trapped and basically forced to play for the NCAA so they can make it to the NFL. And yes, there are limits and restrictions with any occupations. However, these other jobs and occupations don't force you to give up other opportunities for money. 

And to your point about if Tua got $10M a year, what would make him an Alabama player...He would still be a Bama player because it isn't the school paying him at all. In the NFL and other professional leagues, players get millions from other brands and personal endeavors, but it doesn't take them away from being a player on their team. NBA players have their own shoes, but it doesn't make them any less of a team player. Does Aaron Rodgers getting money from State Farm take away from his status as the Packers' starting QB?

Blue in Paradise

January 9th, 2019 at 1:16 PM ^

BINGO!

If players were allowed to turn pro out of high school, all of these people who are in favor of denying these kids universal economic rights would have a reasonable point.

They would have a choice to pursue their career through college or through the pros.

 

Also, many of these kids are already getting six figure paydays under the table so not sure where you going with "feel of the game".   Pretending that it is not happening does not change that.  In the FBI NCAA Basketball case, the bag men and their facilitators just plead guilty in court to paying players - in case someone out there doesn't think that this is happening.

nickelsarcade

January 9th, 2019 at 1:39 PM ^

These are all fair points. I would just add that the NFL's rule requiring three years experience is exactly that: the NFL's rule. The NCAA and NFL are a separate entity, and while I am sure there is some coordination among them, at some point there has to be legal separation to avoid antitrust issues.

And, it isn't true that players need to go to the NCAA. The NFL rules require 3 years removed from high school. The players looking to make endorsement money likely could play for the CFL or other quasi-professional leagues. They choose not to, and I totally get why, but they have some economic agency here. 

In the end, I think the best solution is ensuring that every player has an insurance contract with the premiums paid by the schools/league, and letting players get endorsement deals BUT keeping the money in escrow until they graduate. 

Section 1.8

January 9th, 2019 at 12:38 PM ^

I might (probably not, but I might) consider allowing Michigan football players to accept money for their image and name (which is completely dependent on their wearing the uniform of the University of Michigan, or another school) IF those players also pay their own tuition, etc.

But it probably wouldn't be worth it.  Players then need agents, tax advisors, lawyers.  Their commercial interests will subordinate their role as students.  It widens the already-staggering gulf between current students and revenue-sport athletes.

Its a terrible idea.  A terrible idea that sounds great to all of the people who told us how great college football playoffs would be.

 

UMFanatic96

January 9th, 2019 at 12:49 PM ^

If you asked a random current Michigan football player that is on a full-time scholarship, they would tell you that they are not really students. Football or basketball always comes first. That's why we can have Michigan play at Nebraska at 9 pm on a Tuesday night. Realistically, those players aren't getting home until the morning when they would have class.

We treat the players like students when it comes to whether they can be paid or having a minimum GPA. But we do the exact opposite in every other sense, especially when it comes to the commercialization of basketball and football. The sponsorships of the tournaments, the betting, the profit the NCAA and schools make.

Blue in Paradise

January 9th, 2019 at 1:13 PM ^

"But it probably wouldn't be worth it.  Players then need agents, tax advisors, lawyers.  Their commercial interests will subordinate their role as students.  It widens the already-staggering gulf between current students and revenue-sport athletes."

 

Who are you to make this determination?  If someone offered me $1 million when I was in college to do endorsement, acting, whatever...  I would have happily taken the money and hired whoever was necessary to help out.  But I am sure that you would have turned it down because it wouldn't be worth it.

What happens if Tua has a career ending injury next year?  Who is going to step up and make up his lost earning?

By the way, the reason they cannot accept endorsement has nothing to do with their scholarship, it is the NCAA eligibility restrictions.  I would be perfectly happy with a system where kids could choose to be walk-ons if it allowed them full economic rights in regards to image rights.

Section 1.8

January 9th, 2019 at 1:45 PM ^

Ha!  Exactly wrong.  A terrible analogy.  If you're an actor, your career and visibility doesn't depend on the University of Michigan apart from your getting educated.

Football players and basketball players are catapulting themselves into visibility by virtue of the amazing reputation and spectacle of Michigan football, which predates the NFL by about 60 years.  A kid from Gary, Indiana or Fremont, Ohio may be a good football player but he only becomes a media figure by playing for the University of Michigan.  (Or Notre Dame, Ohio State, etc.) 

As for kids getting treated like professional athletes, you name the issue and I will probably side with making the kids less "athlete" and more "student."  From practice time to game times to admission standards to whatever you might want to list.  I am on board with reforms to make sure that student-athletes are not put in the position of being pseudo-pros.  Let's have that discussion.  Whatever we decide on for making the kids less like professional athletes, "paying them," or "giving them agents, endorsement deals and a collective bargaining agreement" is not going in the direction of "less professional."

Oh, and about a collegian with a pro football future; they sell insurance for that.  I fail to see how an endorsement deal makes the game any safer, or the player's financial future any more certain.  Other than the old, "football careers are short, and the big money needs to be made quickly..."  That should not be a concern of college football.  That should be the subject of a collective bargaining agreement for a professional football minor league.

 

 

Blue in Paradise

January 9th, 2019 at 2:21 PM ^

What you are actually saying is that you want college football and basketball to resemble hockey and baseball?  Minor sports (on the national stage) with a small but passionate following.  Nothing wrong that this view.

Except... your view doesn't count any more than your vote does in a political election. American society has spoken and we want big time college football pageantry with the best of the best athletes playing for our schools.  The universities love this system as they have found a way to make billions from it without having to pay for the labor.

Section 1.8

January 9th, 2019 at 2:56 PM ^

I am just going to pick out your one worst falsehood for challenge.

You suggest that "the universities...have found a way to make billions from it without having to pay for the labor."

I would have supposed that this noxious lie wouldn't get much traction on a site filled with knowledgeable Michigan football fans.  Like the idea that the University pays Jim Harbaugh out of tuition dollars.  Et cetera.

The University of Michigan's profit off of college football is zero.  The Athletic Department operates in the black because of the generosity of thousands of donors, pumping millions of dollars into the budget.  There is plenty of "revenue" from football; basketball too as you know.  And absolutely none of it is "made" as a profit.  The Title IX budget formulae (as well as, to be sure, historical AD choices) siphon it off to field hockey, gymnastics, softball, etc.

So when you want to know who is "making" money off the backs of Michigan football players, go down State Street to look at all of the teams who fly around the country to compete at elite levels.  It isn't the University.  The University is begging people like me for more money every year to make ends meet.  Eastern Michigan's football program has been on the brink of survival.  Illinois' athletic department has more than $250 million in debt; even Alabama has more than $200 million in debt.  They are not awash in billions of dollars.

And don't forget Coach James Harbaugh.  The biggest line-item in the budget is coaching salaries.  I don't frankly know how to address it; but I am not seeing any answers from the demographic cohort that MGoBlog seems to  represent: passionate fans who love their teams and want their schools to hire the absolute top-tier coaches no matter how many millions are required.  They also love their players, and when they see the number of zeroes in some television contracts, they want their favorite star players to get some of that money too.  Oh, but there's this; tickets to the games are so expensive, that they almost never go.  They watch on tv.

 

xtramelanin

January 9th, 2019 at 2:27 PM ^

i think you have hit the nail on the head.  in the abstract, paying players has a little traction.  in the reality, i think you have described the problems pretty well. 

The Mad Hatter

January 9th, 2019 at 3:03 PM ^

You're a pretty moral and decent guy, probably more so than most.  Imagine how things would have gone if you were a millionaire in college.  Probably not well. 

If (when) the players do start making tons of money, there are going to be tons of problems.  Drug addiction, doping, criminality, etc, because teenagers are idiots.  All of them.

xtramelanin

January 9th, 2019 at 5:43 PM ^

agreed re: tons of problems when young people get money, for that matter, when almost anyone gets money.  wealth is a curse, as is celebrity.  i saw it first hand when younger, particularly when i was in socal.  those 'beautiful people' are so messed up, and their kids are worse.  

as to me, the jury is definitely still out on whether i am either moral or decent.  any tips you might have would be appreciated.  

Crisler 71

January 9th, 2019 at 6:26 PM ^

And your puny car dealership can't keep up.  Come to Oregon & be in a Nike commercial. $200,000.  Win a nationa championship with all the other stars we bought, er, sponser.

No, come to Maryland and be in an Underarmour commercial. We bid $250k.

If the kid's that good just let him sign a pro contract like hockey players do.  The kid can be paid and the pro team decides when the kid is good enough to be called up. The NCAA is just the minor league for NBA &NFL anyway.

dipshit moron

January 9th, 2019 at 12:41 PM ^

no! we don't need two pro football leagues. if you really think these poor, poor athletes are so oppressed, then do what's right. if a kid accepts a "full" scholarship then he is obligated  to finish school. the change would be, let any kid that wants to go straight to the pros, out of hs, let them. in real life with every other profession thats how it works for kids graduating hs. you go get a job or you continue your schooling.

for those that skip college and go straight to the pros, if they fail, well welcome to the real world.

 

 

Blue in Paradise

January 9th, 2019 at 1:06 PM ^

If they changed the rule to allow kids to go straight to the NFL, then you might have a point.  However, they are not allowed to do that so your post is meaningless.

Also, are coaches obligated to finish the contracts they sign?  Did Dan Enos or Al Washington fullfil their contract?  What is their punishment? At least be consistent.