Sis Boom Bah?

I have long had a Love/Hate relationship with college sports. I grew up in a Penn State household, looking up to Joe Paterno as an avatar for doing things the right way (oy vey!!!). I went to the University of South Carolina, where they had big time football, basketball and baseball programs with a fevered following, regardless of how the teams performed (which usually wasn’t too good). I watched the NCAA basketball tournament religiously, enthused by every upset (even going out to play basketball at midnight after NC State beat Houston). As a sports fan, I saw college sports as an unpredictable roller coaster that usually delivered. 

• 

• 

• 

On the other hand, I never had any doubts about the “integrity” of the NCAA, which has acts as if it stands for the purity of amateur athletics, while raking in millions of dollars off the achievements of teenagers. Despite declaring that “educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount”, everything done by the NCAA makes clear that it views the kids involved as fodder to justify multi-million-dollar salaries, appease well-heeled alumni and fund over-priced facilities that have more to do with ego than necessity. Their real goal is to generate as much money for the member schools as they can, and make sure that those schools maintain as much control over the athletes as possible. 

My reaction to the recent unanimous Supreme Court ruling that the NCAA could not bar payments and other benefits to student-athletes related to education made clear to me which side of Love/Hate is stronger. I gave a faux high-five to the Court for the decision, glad to see the duplicitous, sanctimonious, hypocrites who run the NCAA taken down a peg. I was so happy with this ruling that I even (forgive me) raised a virtual toast (beer, of course) to Brett Kavanaugh for his damning concurrence where he wrote, “The N.C.A.A. couches its arguments for not paying student-athletes in innocuous labels. But the labels cannot disguise the reality: The N.C.A.A.’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America.” 

While this ruling is, on its face, narrow, limited as it is to benefits related to education, it undoubtedly opens the door to the wider compensation for student-athletes. Already the NCAA has agreed that student-athletes can earn money from autograph signings, personal appearances, endorsements and social media platforms. With this, the floodgates are open. 

As much as I think that allowing these payments has to happen, I know that there will be downsides (I am thinking of renaming this blog Ambivilance.com, because I rarely face an issue where I cannot see both sides. Damn liberal arts education!!!!) Undoubtedly, only a few will benefit. It is unlikely that we are going to see money flowing to second-stringers, or even most starters. And, of course, we are only talking about the big-time sports, basketball, football and maybe baseball. There is little to be gained by athletes in all of the other NCAA sports that don’t have national exposure. 

• 

• 

There are also bound to be other downsides. Schools will undoubtedly figure out a way to get a portion of this revenue, which only increases the money coming into the already cash rich programs. Plus, schools that can effectively market their players will be better placed to attract top recruits. You know that will be the Alabamas and Michigans of the world. The imbalance we already see will likely only increase (mirroring, perhaps, the wealth gap in the country generally). 

The NCAA probably could have headed this off years ago if it had established reasonable and equitable rules for compensating all athletes for the extra time and effort they put in representing their schools. Since at least 2010, some NCAA Athletic Directors advocated providing scholarships beyond the traditional cost of an education — tuition, books, and room and board – to include money to cover other cost-of-living expenses. But the NCAA has fought any such compromise tooth and nail. 

Even worse, the NCAA has continually came down hard on any player caught pocketing even minimal assistance, such as, heaven forbid, an illegal phone jack. Just this last year UMass tennis received two years’ probation, self-imposed a $5,000 fine and had the records and matches from two seasons expunged because two players received “improper benefits” of $252, namely a phone jack in the players’ off-campus apartment. All this towards making the student-athlete “paramount.” 

On the other hand, schools get a slap on the wrist for egregious conduct. For example, the eunuchs at the NCAA decided they had no jurisdiction to punish the University of North Carolina for pushing athletes into fraudulent, no-show classes to keep players eligible. If that doesn’t go to the heart of the supposed bargain where athletes are to get an education in exchange for providing their talents, I don’t know what does.  

I could go on, but I need to keep my blood pressure under control. Suffice it to say that the next few years will be very interesting indeed. We will undoubtedly hear of ridiculous deals, and massive rip-offs, which will have us shaking our heads. Hopefully, someone will come up with some equitable way to fairly fund all athletes, but with the amount of money involved I would not hold my breath. Like it or not, my Love/Hate relationship is here to stay.