Big Time College Football: Respectfully Disagree Part II

In my ongoing search for articles about college football and the possible transition to a professional collegiate league, I recently came across an article at ESPN titled the Myth of Parity. Below are my favorite quotes from the article with my humble responses.

“Yes, for the most part, colleges and universities are making money off of the backs, performances and success of major football and men's basketball programs and the scholarship athletes who play them. But ask yourself: Isn't that what most businesses do?”

Because businesses make money off the backs of its employees, it is okay that the NCAA does the same thing. In this country, businesses pay their employees a reasonable wage depending on the industry, employee experience, tenure (how long they have been there), and a variety of other factors. Some companies pay a decent wage while others, like WalMart, employ a large number of workers that make under $25k a year (there is nothing illegal about it). So with that logic, it is okay that the NCAA, along with the colleges and universities that field these players, make millions off these young adults (like big shareholders at WalMart) while these talented young players make thousands (I guess the NCAA is like WalMart).

The lesson to be learned here is make as much money off the backs of talented collegiate athletes, keep the best possible profit margin, and never change.

“The problem seems to be that we don't look at college athletics as a business. Instead, we subconsciously and constantly (and emotionally) look at college sports as something different. We allow the "school" part to blind us into thinking that the educational piece changes the dynamics of what is really going on and exempts athletics from being about something other than money. It's not. But that's our fault, not the NCAA's.”

I am not really sure who does not look at college athletics as a business, but for anyone who has watched a BCS football game or a I-A basketball game it is big business. With that said, if your are watching a lacrosse game, swimming, or golf, those sports are not about business and are/should-be about student learning (Tiger Woods dropped out of Stanford after two-years; why would be have stayed?). I do agree that people do have an emotional response to sports and this changes how people perceive what is going on on and off the court. But I do disagree that this is all our fault and not the fault of the NCAA’s; the NCAA is responsible for every action it has made and every marketing dollar it has spent in the name of hyping big time college sports.

“We need to stop looking for fairness in this because there is none and there never will be. There are very few businesses that are fair across the board to the people who work for them.”

I know life is not fair; I, like most people learned that lesson a long time ago. It just seems funny that this author is using the ‘life is not fair, so why try?’ argument in his article.

“No one is making kids go to school to make money for the colleges and universities. They and their families choose to do this. It is an agreement that is not set up to pay them in ways that is fair in relation to the money the schools make from their participation. It's rather like taking an unpaid internship to prepare for a better job later in life. It is a trade-off. An unfair one, but it is consensual.”

I agree; players who play for Alabama or Auburn enter a consensual relationship. But, they enter this consensual relationship because they have no other options. There is no minor league for football or basketball players to enter at age 18 unlike baseball, hockey, or soccer. If an 18 year old football player wants to be ‘seen’ he has to go to college and he has to agree to this consensual relationship (18 year olds do not head north and play for the CFL) because he hopes that by working hard he will eventually make the NFL a few years later. For many if they get a degree that is great, but most BCS scholarship players don’t care because it gets in the way of their number one job; playing football.

As an aside, I guess after reading these articles by Dorfman and Jackson I am a little disappointed. These are good writers with good careers, who have influential pulpits, with one loud and clear message; don’t change anything, the current systems works, and these athletes are doing fine (even though nothing is fair).

Big Time College Football: Implementation of the NCAA Pro-League

Now that I have gone over the different aspects of my proposed NCAA Pro-League, when can it be implemented?

Well; it will be a while. ESPN has a contract with the NCAA worth bi$$ions to televise college playoffs from 2014-2025 so most likely nothing will change until 2025. In 2025 the following will have to happen:

- The NCAA will have to give up their football and basketball monopoly;

- A new portion of the NCAA, the NCAA Pro-League would take up the professional responsibilities;

- 32 plus colleges and universities will have to drastically change how they operate football on their campuses;

- 32 plus new NCAA Pro-League football teams will have to be formed with admin staff and the like;

- New media agreements will have to be made;

- Lots of contracts will be signed;

- The NFL would have to be 100% on-board.

So do we really have to wait for the 2026 season for this to be implemented? Yes unless the government gets involved. I would highly recommend the NCAA and the top I-A teams get together and form the NCAA Pro-League, or something equivalent, because if they don’t and the government legislates change then all bets are off on what the end result will be.

But at the end of day, will anything actually change? I fear not. For some reason it seems that colleges and universities will continue to get away with paying college players a few $housand$ while the NCAA, the programs, and the important people in-charge will continue to get paid mi$$ions.

Big Time College Football: Consequences of an NCAA Pro-League

Every decision, every action, and every well thought-out plan has known and unknown consequences. If the NCAA started transitioning some of the I-A football and basketball programs to my proposed NCAA Pro-League there would consequences, and not all of them would be positive.  

Existing Conferences

The new NCAA Football Pro-League will likely keep many, if not all of the existing major conferences. There is no reason to eliminate the AAS, ACC, BIG-10, BIG-12, PAC-12, or SEC when those can be the divisions in the new league. Like the NFL with its two conferences and eight divisions, the NCAA Pro-League can have two conferences and six to ten divisions (depending on how things would be divided). By keeping all of the conferences, the rich history and fan loyalty will be easily transferred to the Pro-League.

Competition

With the NCAA Football Pro-League competition would start in week one. Pro-League teams would not be able to play lower division teams because that would require professional athletes to play amateure athletes, something the NCAA would not allow. With the season starting in week one we would no longer see blowouts as I highlighted in my previous article Competitive? and teams like Georgia would not play New Mexico State or Coastal Carolina anymore.

Playoff System and Bowl Games

The NCAA Football Pro-League could implement a robust playoff system that would include many of the bowl games that are currently running. During the 2011-2012 academic year there were 35 bowl games and 5 all-star games. If the NCAA Pro-League copied the NFL playoff format exactly it could use 11 of the 35 bowl games with the rest used for the I-A division (non-professional). The NCAA-Pro League would also reduce the number of all-star games to one (the all-star game could use one of the bowl games such as...the Hawaii Bowl).

Ownership

An NCAA Pro-League team would need to be majority owned by its cooperating academic institution with minority owners. This would be needed because it would get messy if Iowa State’s owners wanted to move the team somewhere else because the city of Ames and Iowa State did not want to go halfsies on a stadium. The team’s name, identity, brand, and history would be exclusive to the locality so in case a team wanted to get up and leave, a school would not lose their 100-years of history because of the whim of an owner like Al Davis.

Stadiums

What to do about stadiums? What will the city of Ames, Auburn, Gainesville, Tempe, et cetera do about teams wanting new stadiums? They will pretty much do what they are doing today; ask the public to pay for a portion, ask alumni to pay for a portion, and then bankroll the rest as team debt. Texas A&M, from what it seems, has done a great job of asking their alumni to donate millions to renovate Kyle Field so why not make that the norm?

Relegation and Promotion?

Not really relegation and promotion, but there would need to be a process for teams in I-A to prepare and eventually transition to the NCAA Pro-League. Example; if Boise State was not able to make the jump initially they could prepare for several years by raising money, creating a business plan, work on agreements, and set-up a transition plan to be able to become professional when the time is right.

On the flip side if a team was in the NCAA Pro-League and wanted to jump back down to I-A football there would have to be a contingency plan allowing for that. Besides the ownership and money aspects, the athletes would go from being professional to student athletes with all the rules of the NCAA applying. Most of the players who were playing for the team would probably leave requiring the new I-A version of the team to recruit all new players and new coaches.

Bankruptcy

One serious consequence of an NCAA Pro-League would be bankruptcy by individual teams. Because the NCAA Pro-League teams would be outside the control of their cooperating institutions, they could go bankrupt if badly mismanaged. Recently, say the last few decades, the NFL has had zero bankruptcies with most bankruptcies being in hockey or occasionally baseball. This is a testament to the popularity of football and the need to have well managed teams that are financially secure.

Opting Out

Some big name schools might opt to not be part of the NCAA Pro-League signing separate deals with networks creating competition between the NCAA Pro-League and I-A (such as Notre Dame). Since the NCAA would be ‘in-charge’ of I-A and be a majority partner in the Pro-League this scenario would hopefully be avoided but could still work if all parties negotiated for the best possible outcome.

Another scenario of opting out is some of the big name schools might not want to be part of the NCAA Pro-League. Schools such as BYU, Boston College, Duke, and Vanderbilt might decide to not be in the Pro-League. This would be a win-win because it would mean that there would be history and competition not only in the Pro-League but also in I-A. Unfortunately for the schools in I-A there would be less money to go around but by being in the NCAA and not the NCAA Pro-League these schools would be publically acknowledging that as institutions of higher education their core missions are to educate their students and not field football teams.

Big Time College Football: Eligibility and Academics of the NCAA Pro-League

So far I have focused on the money part of big time college football and the formation of my proposed NCAA Pro-League. Next, I will look at eligibility and the higher education aspects of this professional collegiate-level league.

Players will have four years of eligibility in the NCAA Pro-League; there will be no ‘redshirting’ since players will be paid to play. Age eligibility will be 18 to 30 with some exceptions depending on the situation (on the high end, not low). Being on the practice squad will count as part of the four years of eligibility. A high school diploma or GED will be required.

The logic of continuing to have four years of eligibility in the NCAA Pro-League is to limit the duration athletes stay in the league. Like the current system, athletes put in their four years and move on. If there was no limit to how many years a player could play in the NCAA Pro-League it would become the NFL on Saturday with players playing their entire careers at the University of Georgia.

Next, every player who signs a contract for one of the NCAA Pro-League teams will have the option to enroll part-time at the cooperating or an affiliated  institutions. Why part-time? Because the current system of academics works for athletes like Robert Griffin III and his reported academic prowess but the majority of athletes struggle to keep up with their studies while playing big time college football. For those who want to attend college part-time there would be no GPA minimum; you do not want to penalize those who actually want to get an education while playing for big time programs. Ideally, players would take online courses in the fall and take brick and mortar courses during the spring of summer (for the obvious reasons). For those institutions who do not join the Pro-League; nothing would change concerning academic requirements.

The majority of athletes who would sign NCAA Pro-League contracts would be young adults; between 18-24. In the span of four short months these players would go from graduating high school to making more money than their parents. Because of this there would be two mandatory requirements during each year of eligibility; financial planning and a college savings account.

Mandatory financial planning. Each player would be required to take six-credits of financial planning each year or two, three-credit courses. These courses would range from money basics in year one to how to successfully protect and invest your money in the NFL in year four. The idea is to help these young adults successfully manage their money rather than blowing it during their four years of eligibility. At the end of the four years of eligibility, a player could have up to 24 credits of finance/accounting/financial planning credits that could be used when getting their college degree. These credits could be realized by the cooperating institution recognizing those credits, CLEP, competency based credits, et cetera.

Mandatory college savings account. Each player will be required to set-up a college savings account. Like a 401k, Pro-League athletes will be required to save for college so if they complete four years of eligibility and do not make the NFL, they will have money to attend college. Ideally it would be set-up like a 401k where the teams would match the players savings up to a certain percentage. Example: if a player makes $200,000 a years for four-years and saves 10% of his income with the team matching 3% and the market returning 4%, this player will have around $95,000 in their college savings account. If they do not make the NFL and use it for college at the University of Georgia most if not all of their costs would be covered and they would graduate debt free. If they do make the NFL or do not want to use it for college they can cash it out with a penalty.

Finally, the academics at the cooperating institutions. Again, using University of Georgia as the example, the only thing the president would have to worry about every year would be signing a contract with the NCAA Pro-League team(s). After the university decides on how much it will cost the football team to use the name of the institution and facilities (stadium, et cetera), the president would be able to focus on higher education issue because football operations would be outside the university. With that said if Georgia wins the national championship the president can still attend and relish in the accomplishment with the whole country watching and the University of Georgia brand being broadcasted everywhere, especially ESPN. But if a scandal broke-out it would be handled by the CEO of the University of Georgia Pro-League football team, not the president of the university.

To summarize; the NCAA Pro-League allows allows players at big time college football programs to do what they are already doing, play football and try to make the NFL. It also allows them to get paid to play, attend college part-time during their eligibility, and requires them to learn about financial planning and save money for future college attendance.Finally, it allows colleges and universities to be in the business of educating adults while divesting themselves of the day to day operations of big time college football.

Big Time College Football: Respectfully Disagree

In an article for Forbes, Jeffrey Dorfman argues that college athletics should not go professional and gives many good reasons backed up by economic logic. I understand the point of view of the author but I have to respectfully disagree.

To start off, he states that athletes “receive free tuition, room, meal plans, and some money for books and miscellaneous expenses. At the bigger, more successful universities, athletes also receive academic counseling, tutoring, life skill training, and even nutritional advice.” In addition, they also received “free professional coaching, strength and fitness training, and support from athletic trainers and physical therapists.” He estimates that these goods and services vary between $50k to $125k per year, depending on the school, and according to economists, any goods and services is considered pay.

I agree; but.

First, I question what he means by ‘more successful universities’ in this statement. Does he mean Alabama which won three of the last four BCS Championships; or does he mean the Southwestern Athletic Conference that had a seven point bump or the Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference that had a one point bump in their Adjusted Graduation Gap three-year average while the SEC has a negative eighteen? I assume he is talking about BCS wins versus how many football players graduate.

Next, the author asks what about Title IX? Title IX is a legitimate concern and if college athletics or even a few selected sports turned professional under the umbrella of individual higher education institutions Title IX would create serious complications. With my proposed NCAA Pro-League individual professional teams would not receive any Title IX funding because they would be separate from their cooperating institutions so Title IX would be off the table. All other sports still under the control of the University of Georgia for example (except the programs that would go pro like football) would still have to abide by the rules set by Title IX.

The author then discusses a salary cap and “if there is a cap, then the best players may still be ‘exploited’ in the same sense that some people think they are being exploited now.” I agree that the best players would still be exploited because athletics exploit players at every level of competition but should rampant exploitation continue just because that’s how it has always been? To start off, college football makes a lot of money, and I mean a lot more money than it used to make one generation ago. Next, individual programs make a lot of money. Staying in the SEC, the University of Georgia made over $77 million during the 2011-2012 season in which they went 10-4, lost the SEC Championship game and the Outback Bowl to Michigan State, and were ranked #19 at the end of the season; not bad. Currently, players earn what I describe as a pittance, between $4k to $18k in actual take home pay, not including benefits and services. If young football players were making between $100k to $300k per year playing for the University of Georgia in the NCAA Pro-League I don’t think they would mind being ‘exploited’ because they are getting paid to play. It is hard to legitimize and defend a system where the University of Georgia made $77 million in one season while the take-home pay for all football players was less than Mark Richt’s salary.

At the end of the article, the author states again that the majority, or 90% of college athletics loses money. I agree that most programs do lose money and it would be difficult creating professional leagues, but there are people, and more than a handful, calling for professional college level athletics for sports like football and basketball. I don’t think anyone is expecting the NCAA to create professional indoor track and field, golf, or equestrian leagues.

The NCAA, the BCS, and I-A basketball need to do the right thing for themselves and their players and go pro. Create the NCAA Pro-League and let the free market be ‘free’ rather than having the NCAA and all of the ‘successful’ programs make bi$$ions while individual athletes make $housands.

Addendum.

In the comments section the author points out that basketball players can also go pro in Europe and China and football players can go to Canada. I find this funny because the other major North American sports; baseball, ice hockey, and soccer all have viable minor leagues in the US but for football and basketball, the NCAA is the minor league. The CFL has and never will cut out the BCS; a young player will still play four years at Georgia and then move up to Canada to play football if needed. Europe and China will never cut out NCAA I-A basketball; a young player will still play four years at Georgia and then move to Italy to play for an Italian team if needed. Using this argument is not valid.

Finally the author makes a comment about the free market and the number of sports at colleges and universities. I do agree that with the new budget realities the market is going to start cutting many different sports and athletic programs all around the country. But to call the NCAA and what colleges and universities do a free market is humorous.