In its effort to preserve the sanctity of amateur athletics, the NCAA is now considering assessing post-graduation financial penalties on athletes that accept money or other gifts from agents.
Or if that doesn’t fly, the NCAA might try to get the NFL to suspend the benefactor for part of his rookie season.
Those measures seems a bit extreme to me, but if there’s a legitimate reason, I’d buy into them.
Although I must admit I’m a bit confused by the NCAA’s determination, heck even paranoia, about preventing student-athletes from accepting money.
Sure, I know the NCAA wants its amateur sports to stay amateur, creating an even playing field for all its competitors.
But why are we hearing more about this topic from the NCAA than we’ve heard about brain injury prevention and education in football? Given their professed care for the amateur athlete, you’d think the NCAA would take the lead on head injury issues, not wait for the NFL to take action first.
As I got to thinking about the whole topic of college athletes and money, I couldn’t help but wonder: Is the reason the NCAA is so uptight about the possibility of its players getting paid that they think their business could be harmed?
Today’s college athletes are essentially at the mercy of the NCAA. The athletes are dependent on schools for their livelihood (scholarships), and in return, the athletes provide the NCAA and its member institutions with billions of dollars in revenue.
Part of the reason fans such as myself love college sports so much is because of the perceived purity of the collegiate game. Instead of dealing with thrifty owners, complicated collective bargaining agreements and greedy commissioners, we get to paint our faces green and yellow. Maybe the NCAA figures innocence, which makes the collegiate product marketable, could diminish if its athletes are better compensated.
Or perhaps the NCAA acts the way it does because it fears competition in the marketplace. Earlier this year, the University of Nebraska raised $48,000 by selling game-worn jerseys. Not-so-coincidentally, the No. 3 jersey worn by Heisman Trophy candidate Taylor Martinez sold for $1,700.
But just months earlier, a University of Georgia player made a jersey transaction of his own. Star A.J. Green was suspended four games by the NCAA for selling one of his jerseys to an agent.
If players like Green explore other avenues to realize some of their worth (selling signed photos, charging appearance fees to speak at engagements, demanding compensation for their likeness appearing in video games, etc.), then the NCAA takes a financial hit.
Obviously, this is all speculation. The NCAA may have other reasons for doing what it does, but the outward appearances do raise suspicions.
So-called “full-ride” scholarships that the NCAA points to in defense of its indentured servitude of student-athletes isn’t exactly all-encompassing.
On average, “full-ride” scholarship recipients are left with an annual $2,951 tab for schools expenses. While that might not sound like a lot of money, it’s definitely a hefty sum for some college students and their families.
And yes, it’s probably true that most players who take money do so to purchase luxury items, but there’s something fundamentally wrong about how the NCAA profits so greatly off its student athletes, yet those same student athletes aren’t even afforded basic financial assistance.
Add it all up, and something’s definitely fishy about the way the NCAA does business. Laws aren’t being broken, but there seems to be a serious divide between the image the NCAA presents to the public and the actions the organization actually takes.
The NCAA (and its member schools) should take the necessary steps to cover all the expenses of its student athletes — it’s the least they can do.
[email protected]