Showing posts with label division 1 college football. Show all posts
Showing posts with label division 1 college football. Show all posts

Sunday, September 26, 2010

Big Money For College Football


Top division college football players: Are they playing for their schools or are they playing for money? Before you answer this question, consider the huge controversy that exists concerning the influence of corporations upon conferences, universities, coaches, players, and even fans. Just who represents the various components of a major college football program and how are they presently protecting those they represent? It is time to answer, not ignore, such vexing questions.

John V. Lombardi professed, "Throughout the history of intercollegiate sports in America, nothing has caused college sports more trouble than maintaining this construct of the amateur student-athlete. Payments under the table, bribes for recruiting, gambling schemes, secret professional contracts, payments from agents, and an endless litany of other abuses have nibbled at the edges of the amateur student-athlete, each effort captured in some form of NCAA legislation or definition to hold off the contamination of professionalism." (John V. Lombardi, "The Amateur Challenge of College Sports," www.insidehighered.com, August 10 2008)

Michael Rosenberg, writer for Sports Illustrated said, "The great irony of college football is that it is so steeped in Americana, yet is totally un-American. As revenues go up and players work harder, they are ineligible for a raise. (Michael Rosenberg, Viewpoint: "Change Is Long Overdue: College Football Players Should Be Paid," Sports Illustrated, August 26 2010) Considering their great revenue-generating capabilities, gifted college football players should be compensated, shouldn't they?
And, now colleges are not even trying to hide the fact that everything is for sale: conference affiliations, rivalries, game times, luxury suites, buildings, EVERYTHING. Why not pay the athletes for the return they give the universities? Rosenberg had a conversation a few years ago with Myles Brand, NCAA president at the time, that went like this:


Brand: "They can't be paid."
Rosenberg: "Why?"
Brand: "Because they're amateurs."
Rosenberg: "What makes them amateurs?"
Brand: "Well, they can't be paid."
Rosenberg: "Why not?"
Brand: "Because they're amateurs."
Rosenberg: Who decided they are amateurs?
Brand: "We did."
Rosenberg: "Why?"
Brand: "Because we don't pay them."


Donald H. Yee, a pro agent stated, "Yet, I suspect that virtually everyone in our industry -- players, coaches, administrators, boosters, agents and fans -- shed our naivete a long time ago. We know that the sole focus for many star college players is getting ready for pro ball, that coaches are looking for financial security on the backs of teenagers and that boosters enjoy the ego stroke that comes with virtually owning a piece of a team. There isn't anything inherently wrong with these goals, but there isn't anything "amateur" about the process, either." (Donald H. Yee, "A Pro Agent's Case For Paying College Football Players," The Washington Post, August 22, 2010)

The truth of his statements ring true. These college athletes receive one year scholarships, renewable at the head coach's discretion. This is not technically a full-time job with benefits, but it is certainly not old-fashioned amateurism. Doesn't the NCAA's present legislated view of amateurism lack intellectual integrity?

And, as far as NCAA rule violations, some are minor and some are much more serious. Some athletes take money from agents, marketers or others simply because they are hungry (the scholarship is not always enough to buy food). Agendas for violations can be malicious or simply misdirected attempts of good faith such as simple handouts.

Consider the real reason behind the following cloaked dealings. When the Pacific-10 Conference's lured teams from the Mountain West and Big 12 conferences, the realignment had nothing to do with education or amateur sports. Neither did it have anything to do with tradition or football. It had everything to do with money.

Yee reported, "Saddled with expiring television contracts, the Pac-10 wanted to get bigger so it could command larger contracts in its next round of negotiating and possibly launch its own TV network. With the addition of the University of Utah and the University of Colorado, the Pac-10's revenues will grow. Its coaches will make more money, and its players will get bigger and shinier facilities, fancier menus, cushier dorms, more stylish travel arrangements and other perks." ("A Pro Agent's Case For Paying College Football Players," The Washington Post, August 22, 2010)  

Concerning the welfare of players, who was really damaged in the Reggie Bush fiasco? In Bush's case, the NCAA concluded that USC demonstrated a "lack of institutional control" over its football program. Bush's lavish gifts from a sports marketer effectively made him "a pro in college" and the university knew it. For their part, the team received a two-year postseason ban, lost 30 scholarships over three seasons and vacated its victories from the period when Bush was deemed to have been ineligible -- including the 2004 national championship season.

As Yee lamented, "Bush is long gone, now an NFL millionaire. His former USC head coach, Pete Carroll, is long gone, also now an NFL millionaire. Many of the assistant coaches who were there at the time are gone as well, and also became millionaires (e.g. University of Washington head coach Steve Sarkisian). Some left and then came back as millionaires (e.g. new head coach Lane Kiffin). Left to suffer the penalties are the current players, many of whom were in middle school or high school when Bush played." ("A Pro Agent's Case For Paying College Football Players," The Washington Post, August 22, 2010)

A Solution   

Why not simply fix the mess? Wouldn't honesty in college football be a better policy? The sport is a big business that generates huge, untold revenues. Yee suggests a new market-driven reform in ten major steps. All credit for this content is goes to Mr. Yee. The full article is available at  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/19/AR2010081904202.html

1. All of the major football-playing universities should lease the rights to operate a commercial football program on behalf of the university to an independent, outside company.

Leases would be open for bidding. The university and the company winning the contract would share net profits at a negotiated level.  A new business structure for marketing would exist with opportunities for greater revenue, and universities without marketers would simply drop football and allocate money to the real objective -- educating students. 

2. Each university's football corporation could create leagues, whether long- or short-term, with other corporations.

A group of conferences has already formed the BCS, or Bowl Championship Series and has decided to exclude other conferences.This would further take away from loyalties to geography, fan tradition, and traditions. Or, the football corporations could decide to avoid joining a league, simply scheduling games as a free agent. Again, this is hardly novel -- Notre Dame has done it for years.

3. All of the players would be paid a salary, whatever the market would bear.
 
With not scholarships, just as in the pros, players would be paid based on their perceived value to their program. Outstanding high school players would be allowed to experience the fruits of American capitalism just like great college players entering the NFL. Companies would be free to recruit any player with anything they want. The players would pay income taxes; the football corporations would pay Social Security taxes; 401(k) plans could be established. .


4. The corporations could offer a range of educational opportunities.

Academically gifted players could take college classes while vocational-minded players take specialty classes thus eliminating the chance at admission because the university made an exception for an academically less qualified athlete. Or, the athlete could simply concentrate on football, sans college.

5. The NCAA can be eliminated, at least as it relates to football.

The NCAA itself states that it does not have subpoena power, which is one way of admitting that enforcement of its rules is difficult

6. Universities could scrap much of their athletic administrations, just as Vanderbilt University has done.

The chief executive would make decisions, and her mandate would be to ensure that the operation was self-sufficient -- no student fees (or taxpayer dollars, in the case of a public university) would be used to subsidize the football program or facilities. Any profits flowing back to the university could go directly to support the general student body and faculty.

7. Congress and state legislatures wouldn't have to waste time investigating or discussing the regulation of college football.
  

8. Coaches could focus strictly on coaching.  

Players would be employees of the corporation so they could take money from agents or marketers because their amateurism wouldn't be at stake.  

9. Universities could focus on their core mission of educating students.

University presidents wouldn't have to waste their time monitoring a football program, and they wouldn't have to attend any more NCAA functions.

10. Finally, this system would end the tiresome sports media discussions of whether this player or that player was paid.

Donald H. Yee is a lawyer and partner with Yee & Dubin Sports, a Los Angeles sports-management firm that represents professional athletes and coaches, including New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and New Orleans Saints head coach Sean Payto  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/19/AR2010081904202.html

Sunday, September 6, 2009

College Division 1 Athletes Gone Wild

Already, the college football season has produced some very questionable behavior from college athletes. Like it or not, Division 1 players represent the highest level of intercollegiate athletics who are expected to abide by a strict code of behavior to insure their select eligibility. The myth that college football is pure -- an amateur game free of money and a game better behaved than pro football -- is just that, a myth.

Division 1 players are performers who are constantly under the scrutiny of the NCAA, their schools, coaches, and millions of fans. Their every move, on the field and off the field, is open to controversy. Granted, the players generate enormous income for their colleges and are under extreme pressure to produce, but bad behavior of a few casts long shadows over the rest of their team, their school, their division, and the game of college football.

Tony Barnhart of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution says, "Remember this. All of us, the media included, have created this system that starts holding these guys up to public scrutiny and praise before they are old enough to shave. We have created a system where high school children are having signing day press conferences on ESPN. Most—the vast majority in fact—have the maturity to handle it. Some don’t." (February 28 2008)

Barnhart continues to say that the coaches see the parents' child who has been recruited and whose family has been promised that the child will be treated fairly on and off the field. So instead of the program sending him with a one-way bus ticket home after an infraction, many colleges wait for persistent violations of behavior. To quote Barnhart, "As tempting as it might be, you can’t use somebody else’s child in an attempt to scare 100 other athletes into toeing the line."

The fanatical frenzy of a Division 1 football game has become out of hand. Winning makes money for the program and that's what the players, fans, schools, and coaches need to quench the blood lust for the sport. Sportsmanship matters little when an 0-12 team is voted Team With the Best Over-all Behavior or Team With the Highest Graduation Rate. Lee Trevino's twisted Vince Lombardi quote rings true in big-time college football: "Winning isn't everything. It's the money you make doing it that's everything."

From Where Does Bad Behavior Spring?

Pee wee to grade school to high school to college: the chain of play with discipline stressed at every level seems to have done little to transform the ego-driven and troubled youth into a true sportsman. In fact, good sportsmanship seems to be falling out of fashion, youth sports officials note, as overaggressive adults prowl the sidelines and grandstands screaming at officials, coaches and players. Is this where the frenzy begins?

Add to this to the fact that many parents are using their kids in sports to fulfill their own ego needs. Children grow up feeling entitled and turn into brats.

Micheal S. James and Tracy Ziemer of ABC News say some people believe win-at-all-cost coaches, violent parents and poor role models in professional sports may be making child athletes more aggressive and violent, although no hard statistics on assaults at youth sports events exist to prove or disprove it.

Fred Engh, president of the National Alliance for Youth Sports, says. “Far too often, we tell [kids] it’s OK to cheat in order to win, to taunt the players on the other team, to criticize officials.” (ABC News, August 8 2000)

“Not only has the language gone more in the gutter, but we’ve also seen a rise in the number of incidences reported where physical violence has occurred,” says Bob Still, public relations manager for the National Association of Sports Officials. (ABC News, August 8 2000)

Edgar Shields, a professor of exercise and sport science, says his study of more than 2,000 male and female athletes in a broad range of sports showed 80.7 percent accepted intimidation and 44.9 accepted on-field violence as part of the game, even though 56.4 percent thought physical, verbal or gesture intimidation was bad sportsmanship. (ABC News, August 8 2000) It is a trickle-down effect picked up from cues from the kid's heroes on television.

Fred Engh sees one reason children are prone to violent, dangerous behavior. Engh says. “Look at the World Wrestling Federation. Look at the Jerry Springer Show. This is the mentality of a growing number of dysfunctional people that is creeping into youth sports.”

This Week's Sad News

1. After Oregon's college football season opened, it ended for running back LeGarrette Blount. Blount was suspended for all remaining games on Friday for punching Boise State defensive end Byron Hout in the jaw following the 16th-ranked Ducks' 19-8 loss to the 14th-ranked Broncos on Thursday night. Hout yelled in Blount's face and tapped him on the shoulder pad. Before Boise State coach Chris Petersen could pull Hout away, Blount landed a right to Hout's jaw, knocking him to his knees.

Blount also had to be restrained by police from fans heckling him on the way to the locker room.

Chris Petersen said Hout will be disciplined and it will be handled internally. (Los Angeles Times, September 5 2009)

2. Ohio State quarterback Terrelle Pryor, ceremoniously referred to by some as "LeBron in Cleats," wore decorated eye-blacks patches with the words Mika under his right eye and Vick under his left in Ohio State's 31-27 victory over Navy in Columbus Saturday.

According to Pryor, "Mika referred to Pryor's sister." Vick was a nod to Michael Vick, the NFL quarterback who served 18 months in federal prison for his involvement in a dogfighting ring. He is back in the league, with the Philadelphia Eagles. (Tim May, Columbus Dispatch, September 5 2009)

Pryor goes on to explain his actions with these comments. "I know what happened with him and, I mean, I don't want to talk much. I'm just going to be very short and sweet with it," Pryor said yesterday. "But I just feel he made his mistake and I think he just needs more support.

Pryor goes on, "Not everybody is the perfect person in the world. Everyone does -- kills people, murders people, steals from you, steals from me. I just feel that people need to give him a chance."

And, finally, Pryor admits,"I always looked up to Mike Vick and I always will, because I still think he is one of the best quarterbacks," Pryor said. "I love Mike Vick."

Asked for his thoughts on Pryor's choice of names on his eyeblack patches, coach Jim Tressel said he never noticed. "No thoughts," Tressel said. "Didn't know it."

Saturday was viewed as a special day to honor the Navy.

Ohio State and Navy players lined up in the south end zone of Ohio Stadium and shook hands before the game as part of the American Football Coaches Association’s sportsmanship weekend. After that, both teams gathered on each side of the goal posts and ran on the field together through the Ohio State Marching Band. When the game ended, Navy players stood behind OSU for the traditional playing of Carmen Ohio in front of the band.