There’s a big-money college sports scandal brewing

Humorist Max Shulman, best known as the creator of the television character Dobie Gillis, wrote a column syndicated to college newspapers. He once suggested that a school struggling on the field could solve its problem by simply hiring the Green Bay Packers as “artists-in-residence.”

This was in the late 1950s, when people were still concerned about the increasing emphasis on athletics, especially football.

You haven’t heard this term lately. The excessive pressure became overwhelming. Life imitates Shulman’s playful art.

What remains of the wall between professionalism in practice and apparent amateurism has been washed away by the recent announcement that the NCAA and the five major conferences will pay athletes cash salaries in addition to — or perhaps instead of — traditional salaries. a type of compensation in the form of free education, books, accommodation and food.

That will happen if a federal judge approves the deal, which was negotiated to resolve antitrust claims filed by former athletes seeking a share of the bullshit they made for their schools.

There are serious concerns on this issue that require Congressional attention and sober court judgment.

NCAA: Just don’t trust us

First, the NCAA intends to ask Congress for an antitrust exemption similar to the ones it long ago granted to professional baseball, football, hockey and basketball.

This doesn’t sound like a good idea. Antitrust waivers are inherently anticompetitive. The goal appears to be to continually deny that athletes are employees, which would deny them the right to workers’ compensation, pension contributions, collective bargaining and other benefits.

However, athletes at schools like Florida, Florida State and Miami are already employees in fact, if not in name.

Another issue is the impact of the agreement on smaller schools, those below the Division I level, some of which can barely afford to keep the lights on on the field, let alone pay their players’ salaries. Charlie Baker, the NCAA president, argues that classifying athletes as employees would cripple most programs outside power conferences. But a deal with large schools risks the same consequences. Athletes from small schools will also want to earn money. They would have a case.

What about Title IX, the federal law that requires equal treatment for male and female athletes? Will the money that the 69 large schools must allocate, estimated at an average of $100 million a year, be enough to cover the entire budget? Or will it accelerate the elimination of more women’s sports and smaller unisex sports? How much pressure will there be on student activity fees, donors and ticket holders?

There will certainly be bidding wars for the most sought-after high school players and potential transfers. This has already begun, with courts granting support organizations the ability to create combines that pay star players to use their names, images and likenesses.

A scandal is brewing

This is a big money scandal. The scale was revealed this month when Georgia transfer quarterback Jaden Rashada sued in federal court over a recruiting payout he says University of Florida coach Billy Napier promised him but never received. He claims he was set to receive $1 million in a $13.85 million NIL deal, which also included a top booster, and turned down a smaller offer from Miami before transferring to Arizona State.

It turns out that the NCAA was investigating Rashada until a federal judge, acting on a lawsuit brought by Tennessee and Virginia, ordered the NCAA to stop enforcing the NIL rules.

The increasing commercialization of college sports may be unstoppable, but there is much to regret about how far it has already come.

The United States is the only country where colleges and universities are expected to provide the broader community with professional sports entertainment that has little or nothing to do with their educational mission. In too many cases, the term scholar-athlete has become an oxymoron.

The stakes are evident in the realignment of the major conferences, including the dismemberment of the PAC-10, the expansion of the Atlantic Coast Conference to include schools on the Pacific Coast, and questionable attempts by Florida State and Clemson to cut their contracts with the ACC.

The paradox of college sports is a long way from its origins, when students formed their own clubs and competitions without expecting any freebies. In some small schools they still play for fun and for a peculiar ideal of sportsmanship.

Professional leagues should pay

But the big-school programs, in addition to creating an illogical and unacademic burden for their presidents, also act as a free training program for professional football and basketball, saving them from having to run farm teams as is the case with baseball. This gratuitous charging of fees is unacceptable and a way must be found for the NFL and NBA to contribute to college costs.

The question must further be asked whether it is not profoundly hypocritical for the NCAA to continue to insist that athletes make “satisfactory progress” toward a college degree in order to continue to play.

In a story from the 1950s, probably apocryphal, a college coach somewhere in Florida was upset to hear the report of his award-winning freshman recruit that he was making As in his classes.

“You are here to play football,” the coach allegedly said.

True or not, the story made some sense.

Likewise Max Shulman.

The Sun Sentinel’s editorial board includes managing editor Steve Bousquet, deputy managing editor Dan Sweeney, managing editor Martin Dyckman and managing editor Julie Anderson. Editorials are the opinion of the Management Board and are written by one of its members or a person designated by him. To contact us, please email [email protected].