From the Bench

Dear Marcus, Payday for Players Will Never Work

Robert Shields

Former Razorback football star Marcus Elliott has been on a crusade as of late when co-hosting on Drive Time Sports, and this topic seems to have sparked quite a debate across the state. His soapbox: Pay the players.

He is not alone in believing that college athletes, in particular football players, should be paid for all the revenue they generate in the billion-dollar business of college football. For or against, this has become the topic du jour this summer.

Now I weigh in so we can all put this issue to bed.

The Terrelle Pryor situation at Ohio State has brought this issue all the more to the forefront. It’s easy to hate on Pryor – he’s a punk kid that took down his million-dollar coach and one of the most storied college football programs in the country. He is a symptom of the larger problem.

I guess I can buy the argument that it was not Pryor who made him the way that he is and that it was the system that is in place that allows this to happen. What I don’t buy, however, is that by throwing more money at the problem and paying players it fixes anything.

Giving football players an extra $300 a month is laughable. It will not even come close to fixing the problem and will probably make it worse.

Where Elliott makes a sensible suggestion is in money generated from merchandise sales that is directly related to a player. Although the name wasn’t on the back, it was simple for any fan to infer that the Razorback jersey they bought at JCPenney with a No. 15 on the back represented Ryan Mallett just like the No. 5 several years ago represented Darren McFadden.

If I am wrong, the UA can prove it by not allowing apparel manufacturers to use the star’s number next time and we’ll see if that company complains about lagging sales.

Roughly two-dozen schools in major college football actually operate in the black. The vast majority operates in the red and almost all are subsidized by other student fees. But for the existence of the university, none of these punk kids would even be known.

It’s also not like the kids are not compensated at all. The difference in earnings potential between having a college degree and not having a college degree is in the millions over a lifetime. If these kids take advantage of their schooling, almost all of them can leave with a degree. If they wanted, most could leave with a great degree worth more than any amount the school could have paid them.

Some do, but we all know that is more the exception than the rule as these kids focus solely on athletics and partying and not so much on classes or finishing their major to get a degree.

There is also the problem of Title IX. If anyone thinks they can pay male athletes and not female athletes, they’re living in another century. The economic reality is that schools paying players just won’t work.

It does seem reasonable to me that if a player wanted to start his own website and sell red football jerseys with the number 15, that he should have that right. It is America after all.

I also can’t fault a kid who sells his own things. If you give a kid a ring, it’s his right to sell it. Otherwise, don’t give it to him. The NCAA does not see it that way, but they are flat out wrong.

So, the system is busted. How do you fix it? A lot of my suggestions will never happen because it’s a billion-dollar industry and my suggestions would hurt that model. Still, it won’t stop me from suggesting.

The first idea is doing away with all athletic scholarships, which actually goes in the opposite direction of paying players. I have always been a firm believer that if everyone is going the same direction, it’s often wrong and Groupthink has taken over.

This provision would have to include forbidding all coaches from having any contact with any prospective athlete at any time. All contact would have to be generated by the recruit. A coach could not even call a player back. To do so would make that player ineligible at that school.

The NCAA also has to find a way to address seven-on-seven football. It is a breeding ground for corruption during the summer with agents and scouting services. It’s football’s version of summer basketball, which also has its pitfalls. Plus, it really teaches nothing unless you are going into professional touch football like in the lingerie league.

Then there is the issue of scouting services or whatever you want to call them. They are the groups that follow kids and then markets them to universities. The NCAA has to outlaw schools from having contact with them because these services provide a huge loophole.

Some have suggested tougher penalties and particularly monetary fines. I just don’t see how that works. Who determines it? Who collects it? Who gets to spend it? And under what authority? There this whole Fifth Amendment thing that gets in the way because it’s illegal taking. You’re afforded due process in this country before someone can take your property, and that also includes money.

It becomes a kangaroo court if the NCAA gets to play prosecutor, judge, and jury in order to keep their member institutions’ money. I get that the infractions committee is made up of member institutions, but it’s not enough separation and independence for my taste.

So, it is a mess and a mess that I doubt anyone wants to really address, but it just gives everyone something to talk about and be self-righteous about during the summer until the first kickoff when we all become guilty again of supporting the corrupt system in place.

But my verdict is don’t pay the players. Anyone is welcome to cite this decision in the argument with Marcus on Drive Time Sports.



Send your suggestions to fromthebench@yahoo.com.

Follow me on Twitter @rsfromthebench.

end