If you’re on the fence between spending your collegiate career playing football or baseball, perhaps you should don the shoulder pads and helmet.
Because if the players that took the field last Saturday with the letters APU, which stands for All Players United, written on their wristbands get their way, you’ll get paid to play.
As if a free education, an unlimited amount of prestige and the opportunity of a lifetime wasn’t enough. Slaving away playing a great game and getting all this in return must be rough.
And because that money will probably be allocated to just football, because we all know how little college baseball makes in comparison, maybe they should’ve written AFPU for All Football Players United.
After Houston Texans running back Arian Foster so bravely told the media he took money on the side when he played for Tennessee because he was hungry, the fire was stoked even further.
Foster said he had to choose between paying for rent and paying for food.
Come on. Really? A four-year starter at an SEC school isn’t getting his room and board paid for and doesn’t get a free meal plan? Either someone is being too much of a whiner or we need to do some serious investigating into the University of Tennessee.
What’s the problem Arian? Was the plethora of campus dining choices not enough? I’ve seen pictures of the salad bar there, and it looks magnificent.
I understand that college football has become the second biggest sport next to the NFL, and the money that is being made is astronomical. But I feel to even make the argument that players should take some of the cut damages the integrity of amateur sports.
Let’s not forget, these are not professional athletes. They’re amateurs.
And if universities can jack up the price of tuition for every single student on campus on a nearly yearly basis, yet still have the resources to give football players full rides, just where is that money coming from?
So what happens if a scholarship isn’t enough for Justin Arias, quarterback for the Idaho State football team? Let’s say ISU football was generating enough money to give everyone on the team a paycheck. Money that would otherwise be cycled back through the school to pay for updated facilities, athletic trainers and scholarships for other programs is now being given to players.
That money wouldn’t be enough. In a few years time, players will say their compensation still isn’t fair. So because we all love college football, scholarships will start being taken away from the softball team, the Bengal tennis players won’t get the best rackets and the track will have holes in it. We won’t need to worry about ISU’s volleyball team, because given coach Chad Tiechert’s resume, he could coach an actual bengal tiger to play volleyball.
Maybe I’m being dramatic. The end-of-integrity doomsday scenario probably won’t happen.
But to me, it still lacks that integrity. And the minute we start paying college football players, we lose it. It just becomes another business, another way to make a buck. These kids are there to learn, and that’s the bottom line. We can sell out 100,000 capacity stadiums, have multi-million dollar TV deals and make head coaches the highest paid citizens in any given state.
But in the end, it’s amateur sports. The only thing separating a college star from a high school star is two things: age and the almighty dollar.



(1) comment
A bit naive, Josh. There is nothing "amateur" about big-time college athletics. Television is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into big-time programs, coaches at power schools are making $2 M to $4 M a year, and places like Oregon are building Taj Mahal-like "football centers" as coaches offices, players lounges and recruiting eye candy. The television networks sell hundreds of millions of dollars worth of advertising so they can show the efforts of 18- to 22-year-old young men, and everybody is taking a cut -- except the players who risk short- and long-term damage to their bodies and their brains.
The schools sell memorabilia that the players sign, the video companies sell games that feature the players' images, and the athletic departments pocket the "donations" to booster clubs that are required in order to purchase tickets -- everybody gets a cut, except the players, who are actually producting the "product" that people are paying for.
In the mean time, people like you argue that players should be happy with their scholarship and meal money, while their coach makes a couple of million bucks a year. It is an argument that is reminiscent of the one people used to make before baseball's Reserve Clause was struck down. "Oh, baseball players make plenty of money, if they're not happy they don't have to play." All the while owners were getting richer and richer. It took the players forming a union and taking a stand to get a bigger piece of the pie they were baking, and it will take collective action by the college athletes to say, "Enough -- we're going to get our share."
In the end, there will be a "Super Conference" of about 80 schools from the conferences with the most lavish television contracts. They WILL pay their players, and then there will separate divisions for schools like Idaho State that can't afford to. It took athletes in the professional sports leagues years to get to the point where they get an equitable share of the fruits of their labors, and it will take time for big-time college athletes, too. But it will happen -- it is inevitable, and right.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In