More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dan Treadway

Dan Treadway

Posted: October 27, 2010 02:18 PM

The College Football Fix

What's Your Reaction:

Josh Luchs, a former agent affiliated with the NFL, recently outlined his history in the business, specifically his experiences enticing collegiate athletes to become clients upon graduation by offering them what the NCAA defines a "improper benefits." What made Luchs' story unique was that it named specific names, and upon being contacted, many of the players Luchs mentioned confirmed his story.

For a very brief period surrounding the release of the report, it was the talk of the sports world, even garnering the top story on ESPN's website, which is rare for a Sports Illustrated exclusive. But after only three days, the residual disappointment and shock caused by the confessions was nearly completely replaced in the consciousness of the greater pubic by surprise and intrigue over 19th ranked Wisconsin's upset victory over Ohio State, the top ranked team in the country.

The way the situation played out was a microcosm of the reason that the corruption that occurs in college athletics will continue until serious reforms are made. In short, in the minds of most fans, the entertainment value of college football surpasses the seedy dealings that occur behind the scenes.

The clear problem is that college football is a money industry that does not compensate its talent properly.

A small case in point, A.J. Green, a star wide receiver at the University of Georgia, was suspended for four games to start this season for selling a game worn jersey for $1,000. The suspension most definitely hindered his stock in the NFL draft, not only for the time he spent off the field, but also because NFL teams will likely use his "questionable character" as a bargaining chip when negotiating his first contract.

On the flipside, if one logs onto Huskers.com, the official website of University of Nebraska football, they can bid on the game-worn player jerseys, with some of the auctions, sure enough, being in the range of $1,000. And this is for jersey's from a game that the Cornhuskers lost.

In a society that runs on the maxim that a person should be rewarded for the desirable abilities they possess, it makes little sense for college football players playing in profitable programs to be penalized for capitalizing on their talent, while the institutions they play for unabashedly do so.

The hypocrisy is obvious, but the solution is not. Simply allowing Universities to compensate players unrestricted is not feasible. A report recently released by the NCAA revealed that only 14 of 120 Division I-A athletic programs turned a profit last year. With the state of higher education being what it is, most universities are struggling to maintain a liberal arts department, much less be concerned with paying their quarterback.

The answer, painful as it may seem, is that many schools need to eliminate their football programs.

Before you say "harrumph!" consider the case of Northeastern University, which ended its 74-year football tradition last year. The elimination of the team, which was unprofitable, resulted in the University saving between $3-$5 million annually. It also didn't negatively affect other school affairs: the amount of donors and applications to the university rose despite the loss of the program.

The natural critique to proposing the elimination of football programs is that unprofitable squads may lose money, but they foster University pride, which results in donors and a more cohesive academic institution. I'm unsure how some define pride, but having ones schools be paid upwards to $500,000 in order to travel to a hostile stadium and be defeated by an embarrassing margin hardly resembles my definition of the term. Last year Western Kentucky University was paid $700,000 by the University of Tennessee, one of the few schools that turn a profit through their athletic department, to travel to Knoxville and subsequently be defeated 63-7. It's no surprise that these small schools need such paydays -- many of them are outnumbered in terms of athletic department funding by more than a five-to-one margin relative to large schools -- but the practice is far from prideful.

The athletic departments at large schools that do thrive are self-sustaining, meaning that the vast majority profits made from the football program are fed back into the football program. At large football school, athletes are often hoarded into similar majors, while living in separate dorms and eating at separate cafeterias, all free of charge. In short, if one is worried about athletes getting preferential treatment at their universities as a result of receiving compensation, they should re-visit the current realities of college football.

College football has only become more money-driven throughout its history, and with rising TV contracts and increased media coverage, this is not going to change. At some point a line needs to be drawn in the sand, and individuals need to recognize that the reason college athletes were not paid half a century ago was because there was not a market for it. The schools that have grown their programs into money machines must be responsible for compensating their players, and the teams that have been unable to keep up, much like a failing business, must fold.

 

Follow Dan Treadway on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Dan_Treadway

Josh Luchs, a former agent affiliated with the NFL, recently outlined his history in the business, specifically his experiences enticing collegiate athletes to become clients upon graduation by offeri...
Josh Luchs, a former agent affiliated with the NFL, recently outlined his history in the business, specifically his experiences enticing collegiate athletes to become clients upon graduation by offeri...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:51 PM on 11/01/2010
The answer, painful as it may seem, is that many schools need to eliminate their football programs.

Now there's an idea. I thought college was supposed to be about learning, not playing sports.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:47 AM on 11/01/2010
Texas' program may be dollar driven...But Baylor's isn't!...How 'bout them Bears!...time for Mack to hang it up and open that Lexus dealership???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frank day
Republican = FAIL
08:49 PM on 10/30/2010
Get rid of Folklore and Prelaw.

Keep Football!
07:13 PM on 10/30/2010
Off topic .. but how 'bout my Fighting Illini!?
photo
progressivestance84
The Right is Wrong.
05:33 PM on 10/28/2010
They get a free ride to college, where they major in keg stands. Boo hoo for the college athletes.
12:19 PM on 10/28/2010
Colleges should eliminate all athletic programs and fire all the staff and use any savings to bolster the mission of the university...to learn something. Sports can still exist as a club activity. Big time athletic programs, like football and basketball can still be affiliated with universities but as a completely separate NFL or NBA supported training camps.High school kids can try out for a spot at one of these university-affiliated camps. And they don't need to go through the charade of being an actual student interested in academics. Let the "camp" generate money and be self-supporting, but completely separate from normal university operations. With this model, the mission of the university is preserved, the ridiculous charade of the "student-athlete" is eliminated, and the fans still get their "release the lions" experience at the big university colosseum every Saturday afternoon during football season.
photo
Jo Kurrent
End the two-party nightmare!
06:03 PM on 10/28/2010
You know, this isn't a bad idea at all.
07:43 AM on 10/31/2010
At major Universities, the Athletic department is separate from the rest of college financially. In other words, money for the Department comes from ticket sales to games, thus the football program actually pays for almost the entire athletic program.
04:43 PM on 10/27/2010
So with the astronomical cost of attending college these days, a full scholarship doesn't count as reasonable compensation?
03:51 PM on 10/27/2010
Do your research or tell the truth, if you look at the report, SIXTY-EIGHT FBS football programs produced profit. The 14 that he mentioned actually turned a profit in the total athletic department. Football is a MONEY PRODUCER for the majority of FBS colleges. My brother is on the track team. He gets money from the school, but the track team doesn't actually produce a penny. Every event it free admission, while the football team sells out a 70,000 person stadium for every game. The cheapest seats are $25...
A telling tidbit from the report?: NOT A SINGLE ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT WITHOUT A FOOTBALL TEAM MADE A PROFIT! Quote from ESPN article: "The fiscal fortunes of major college athletic programs without football teams were even worse. None of the 97 schools in that category reported making money from athletics, with median losses of more than $2.8 million."
DROP FOOTBALL!? That's the only program worth keeping! If we're going to drop programs cut the women's basketball teams, volleyball teams, soccer teams, olympic sports, etc. Those are the money-suckers at colleges across the US.
The real problem is that colleges are forced my UNFAIR laws to have "all or nothing." Because of these laws, large sums of money that could be put toward education are paid to programs that ABSOLUTELY NO ONE CARES ABOUT. (except the 12 players on the women's soccer team who are getting free money) Let's face the real issue, please.
07:39 AM on 10/31/2010
Good point, I know at many schools the football program makes up the shortfall in other programs, so the athletic department runs on its' own.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:26 PM on 10/27/2010
I hope you receive an "A" for your insightful article. The fact that money has become the driving force in determining success in college football, is discouraging. The argument that revenues from football pay for most of the other intercollegiate sports is probably true. However, the alumni pride and game day pageantry displayed on a football weekend, despite the win-loss record, is healthy and very American. The Ivy League is a good example of the successful disconnection of money from intercollegiate athletics.
photo
Computer Geek
Logician Atheist Lefty
02:56 PM on 10/27/2010
Then when the college players are paid just like pro players, I'll stop watching them too just like I stopped watching pro baseball and pro football.