COLLEGE FOOTBALL PAY FOR PLAY
Hello all, little bit of a different format for this one. With the NCAA recently passing the “Pay for likeness” rule (as in, yesterday), TOB would like to share some thoughts on this topic. Feel free to give this quick article a read, it’s about a 2 minute rundown of what may or may not happen:
Good to see Lebron James in there talking about how student/athletes should get paid, right after his comments on China (or non comments). Apparently he feels like being uninformed on foreign policy is a good reason not to speak out, but being uninformed on college athletics (did I miss him getting an economics degree?) is no such deterrent. TOB is no Lebron hater, just a hater of hypocrites.
The topic of paying college athletes is one that has been in the public consciousness ever since TOB has been enjoying college sports. While in college, TOB witnessed several classmates playing DII level sports and often wondered how they were able to keep a decent GPA while spending all of that time at practice and away for games (oh wait, one of those guys changed his major, the other was Robert the Cheech…so yeah). At the time, it seemed like a good compromise would be to pay the athletes for the time they spent at practice, games, etc. an hourly wage. TOB was writing for the school newspaper and collecting a wage (at $8/hour and 4 hours/article, yeah, TOB was doing pretty well from the beginning), so why not pay athletes a similar scale for say, 20 hours a week. That would be enough for some of these guys to have beer money, snack money, date money, gas money, or whatever it is high profile D1 athletes pretend to not have enough money for. This could work for revenue generating sports, but what kind of controversy would that cause on campus???
Interestingly enough, it has recently occurred to TOB that this topic falls well within the political spectrum. Answer just a few questions and TOB can probably tell you where you fall on the “paying players” topic. Conservatives tend to be very against paying players, liberals tend to be very for paying players. There seems to be almost no middle ground. TOB has a wide swath of friends that span both sides of the political spectrum and this holds true with literally everyone. “But TOB, everyone knows that the generations under the age of 40 are financially conservative and socially liberal. We don’t subscribe to the two party system, it’s all a scam to get people to hate each other and just keep the same crooks in power indefinitely.” –Typical TOB reader (or me, to a friend, perhaps last weekend after a few beers). Even these people (TOB included) tend to lean one way or the other, if ever so slightly.
How this applies to the NCAA is fascinating to TOB, hence the article.
That is not to say student athletes aren’t taken advantage of to some degree. The NCAA makes a LOT of money. In all but 11 states, a college football or college basketball coach is the highest paid state employee. That seems wrong, and it may be wrong…or it may not be. Based on some quick research, it was determined that a typical university spends 1-5% of their operating budget on recruitment of new students. This is not including athletes; this is commercials, marketing, college fairs, etc. The University of Alabama has an operating budget of $1.1 Billion based on an article in the Tuscaloosa News from September 5, 2019. Let’s say 3% of this budget is earmarked for marketing, which would be $33M. Nick Saban makes about $9M per year. Is it fair to say that he recruits 1/5 of the students that go to Alabama with the football program being so huge? Probably not, but it’s likely not as far off as most would want to believe. This is not to justify any coach’s salary, just something worth mentioning since that is one of the first arguments for paying the players (the large coach salaries).
The top football programs bring in quite a bit of money (newsflash!). See the top 10 below:
1. Texas A&M - $148M revenue / $107M profit
2. Texas - $133M revenue / $87M profit
3. Michigan - $127M revenue / $75M profit
4. Alabama - $127M revenue / $59M profit
5. Ohio State - $120M revenue / $69M profit
6. Oklahoma - $118M revenue / $72M profit
7. Notre Dame - $112M revenue / $72M profit
8. Auburn - $112M revenue / $61M profit
9. LSU - $112M revenue / $56M profit
10. Florida - $111M revenue / $67M profit
That’s a lot of money brought in, not just revenue, but profit. Even with Saban’s outsized salary, Bama still pockets almost $60M with the football program. That’s good for about 5% of their operating budget. TOB could not find how much Alabama spends on all sports, but it could be assumed that the $60M football brings in certainly helps keep others that do not draw fans, attention, or money. Love women’s field hockey? Love men’s field hockey? Well, the football program probably helps pay for the field and the weird little clubs you guys use. What’s the deal on those things anyway? Just go ahead and paint them white with a red stripe and complete the candy cane look. In fact, put Santa hats on instead of helmets and TOB will be a regular viewer!
Anyway, the current system is very socialist. A few very famous players generate a ton of revenue, and essentially share it with the rest of the 500,000 student athletes, most of whom are not as talented, don’t work as hard, and will never produce the results (i.e. interest and $$$) of these chosen few. Quick, name the last 5 Heisman Trophy winners. Okay, now the last 5 Naismith College Basketball Player of the Year Award winners. “Probably a Tebow. Well, that was probably more like 10 years ago…Johnny Football? Baker Mayfield, he’s famous right? I’ve heard of that Zion kid.” – Random TOB fan who is furious that student athletes aren’t paid by the schools.
The new system would be very capitalist. Famous/more talented players get paid a ton of money while the rest of the players remain anonymous even though they are likely working just as hard as the .001% who make the most money. “These kids get a free education. Oh, they have to play a sport too? Boo hoo, go be big man on campus, and get a free $40,000+ per year education. They should be happy with what they get. Not to mention what they are getting under the table.” – Random TOB fan who is very against paying players.
Fan ‘A’ is liberal, fan ‘B’ is conservative. Everyone who watches any college sports has had that conversation and heard both of the arguments. What fascinates TOB about this is how diametrically opposed this situation is to our current economic reality. America’s current system is capitalistic. There is large economic inequality between the more talented/fortunate/hard working/lucky/however you want to look at it versus the incompetent/unfortunate/lazy/starcrossed/the opposite of the 1%. This capitalistic system is loved by the politically conservative. However, when translated to college sports, apparently it is not the preferred system. Currently all players are treated equal, from the Heisman winner to the last player on the ribbon waving team. This would be a liberal’s dream. However, when translated to college sports it is seen as exploitive. Gotta love people who want change just for change’s sake (or status quo for status quo’s sake). TOB is fully aware that is probably not grammatically correct, but you get the idea.
TOB sees the possible change of players getting paid for their likeness as the best of all possible solutions. Profitable programs continue to help to fund other sports, so scholarships don’t suffer. Team sports are shown to help build character, improve grades, lead to higher graduation rates, happiness, socialization, etc. Why mess with that, even for sports TOB doesn’t take very seriously? Additionally, players who garner attention can capitalize on that without worry of penalty (and perhaps go to a coach funded BBQ without losing all eligibility and painted as some sort of a monster). The NCAA loves it because they fund 0% of this, and ideally they will be able to cut some budget in the area of rules enforcement.
“But TOB, those teams listed above are going to dominate and the smaller schools won’t stand a chance.” – No reader of TOB, you all are too sophisticated to actually believe this. However, when speaking with a naïve fan of mid major school X who thinks they are just one recruiting class away from competing with the big boys, remind them that that list could have been made 30 years ago and it would have looked eerily similar. The blue bloods will always be the blue bloods. You can either get on board, or live your life frustrated. The NCAA won HUGE on this. Not only did they appear to concede, they get to continue on doing exactly what they always have been, with less restrictions, and a lower budget.
Long live College Athletics!!!!
-Tonyonball
