The A.J. Green Suspension: Another Example of the NCAA Double Standard

Image via Wikipedia

While the Georgia Bulldogs certainly impressed its fans by easily defeating the Ragin' Cajuns of Louisiana-Lafayette last week, the team could have padded the 55-7 final score even more had star junior wide receiver A.J. Green been eligible to play. Green is being held out of the first four games of the season because he broke NCAA rules by selling a jersey that he wore during the Independence Bowl to a person who fits the NCAA's definition of an agent. NCAA rules forbid student athletes from selling memorabilia. This bizarre turn of events is yet another example of the double standard in collegiate athletics; that is, the only entities who can immediately profit from the performance of college athletes are the schools and the NCAA. Not the players; not the guys who throw the touchdown passes and make the game-winning shots; just the schools and the almighty NCAA.

The underlying issue of the double standard is whether college athletes are entitled to earnings based on performance, much like the professionals that they aspire to be. When I say "earnings," I mean a paycheck or stipend that the athlete is free to use however he or she wishes. A common counter argument to the pay-for-play opinion is that college athletes, by virtue of generous scholarships, basically receive a free education/degree. While, objectively speaking, that is true, the value of the education/degree that athletes of big-time college sports programs receive must be adjusted based on each individual recipient. Let me explain.

A universally recognized principle of education is "you get out what you put in." Although the correlation between work and high scholastic achievement is not perfect, it sure is strong. Thus, while many external factors (quality/accessibility of professors, resources, etc.) play a role in a student's education, ultimately, the burden falls on the student. The value of an education is determined primarily by the student involved. And when an athlete of a big-time football or basketball program is involved, the value of his education is lower than that of a normal student.

Simply put, education is not a high priority for athletes on revenue-sport (basketball and football) teams. With dreams of entering the professional ranks and signing lucrative contracts, these athletes see college as a formality and learning as a byproduct of that formality. In other words, these athletes are just paying their dues. For NBA hopefuls, that means at least one year in college (John Wall, O.J. Mayo, Carmelo Anthony, and the list goes on and on) or one year in a professional league (Brandon Jennings) before entering the draft or signing with a team. For football players, it means at least three years in college (Mark Sanchez, Reggie Bush, etc.). In fact, in both sports, we are shocked when a player decides to forgo the draft and play another season (Jake Locker, Matt Leinart, Kyle Singler, Patrick Patterson, etc.).

College attendance is nothing more than a rite of passage. But notice that I did not say that a degree is a rite of passage. College attendance is a rite of passage. One year for basketball players. Three years for football players. While some players do finish four years of schooling and obtain a degree, many simply go through the motion. The NBA/NFL is the dream; a degree is not. So why would an athlete on a revenue-sport team put in a lot, if any, effort toward his education? He doesn't need to because that degree has no relevance to his professional basketball/football career! I have attended classes at two different universities with big-time college football and basketball programs. The athletes who have legitimate chances at going pro do not take classes seriously. It's a fact. After one to three years of going through the motions for classes and tests, how much knowledge could these athletes possibly retain? None. And that's why the education they receive is inferior to the education of a student who studies ten to twenty hours per week and arrives to class on time.

So if athletes of revenue-sport teams do not procure legitimate educations, then what do they get in return for their performance? A year or two of partying, girls, and feeling like the big man on campus? That's about it. Meanwhile, the NCAA, the schools, the television networks, and other organizations such as the BCS, laugh all the way to the bank. For example, according to this article, March Madness generates over 90% of the NCAA's entire operating revenue; CBS just entered a $6.1 billion contract for the next 11 years to televise tournament games. Furthermore, the NCAA annually makes over $40 million in ticket sales. That does not count advertisements, merchandise, and other revenue streams. And that does not even take into account the BCS and college football (the Pac-10 made $17.7 million last season from BCS-related revenue).

Ultimately, I am not saying that college athletes should sign contracts and be paid millions of dollars. I think there needs to be a separation between amateur and professional athletes. However, when I look at the gargantuan profits that everyone--except for the player--annually rake in, it sickens me. The players are like string puppets. And they will continue to serve that purpose until someone reinvents amateur athletics, which will only begin once we admit that education is not sufficient compensation for most athletes. I realistically cannot see a legitimate pay-for-play policy in college athletics. The only fair thing would be to pay these athletes like we pay the pros, but that distorts the line between amateur and professional, and I don't think that line should be blurred.

College football is in a unique position because it would be insane for the NFL to allow high school players to jump to its league. Their bodies and minds are simply not ready. I suppose the NFL could institute some sort of development league or minor league system and grow players there. But that takes away the history and tradition of college football, which would be a shame to lose. I think college football is destined to either remain the same forever (athletes being taken advantage of) or stop trying to trick itself into thinking these players value education and institute a pay-for-play mechanism.

On the other hand, we can save the hypocrisy in college basketball by simply abolishing the college attendance requirement. Let's let high school kids enter the draft again. If they are good enough they can make the pro roster, and if not, they can grow in the NBA D-League. Where's the harm? College attendance does not guarantee a more mature product (see Tyreke Evans, Plaxico Burress, etc.)

We need to stop kidding ourselves. End the nonsense, at least in basketball. Someone will  eventually find a remedy for the gridiron.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Georgia Bulldogs' A.J. Green ineligible for three more games (sports.espn.go.com)

How to Stop Agent-Athlete Corruption in College Athletics

Image via Wikipedia

After the NCAA Infractions Committee body-slammed USC's football program for its "lack of institutional control" in its handling of former star running back Reggie Bush, Trojan fans immediately wondered why the NCAA chose to punish its beloved team, current players, and new coaches for the crimes allegedly committed during a previous regime. In essence, why should current players, such as starting quarterback Matt Barkley, be banned from postseason play when they had absolutely no relationship with the Bush-led teams of the past? The answer is simple - because when a scandal like this breaks loose, the NCAA wants to punish someone, but that someone needs to be within NCAA jurisdiction. Once Bush entered the NFL Draft and signed with the New Orleans Saints, he lost his status as an amateur athlete (Translation:  Bush no longer "belonged" to the NCAA). And Lloyd Lake, the independent sports agent who allegedly tampered with Bush and Bush's family, has as much accountability to the NCAA as Ronnie does to Sammi on MTV's "Jersey Shore" (For those of you unfamiliar with the show…zero). Thus, by process of elimination, who could the NCAA have spanked for this "egregious" oversight? USC. The NCAA had to punish the Trojans because the Trojans were the only participant in this scandal that fell under the NCAA's reach. And while I blame the NCAA for being reckless in the severity of its punishment, I do not blame them for reprimanding the school in general because it was the only recourse offered to the NCAA in our flawed athletic system.

In the current system, the lack of collaboration between the NCAA and professional sports leagues, especially the National Football League and the National Basketball Association, enables athletes and sports agents to violate the rules of amateurism, reap the benefits of those violations, and avoid the consequences of their actions. Let's take a look at an example of how the system allows itself to be abused. And because I hate to beat a dead horse (the Bush scandal), let's examine the events surrounding Marcus Camby's impropriety during his time on the University of Massachusetts basketball team.

As an All-American at UMass, every agent sought to recruit center Marcus Camby in hopes of bringing in a healthy commission on Camby's inevitable payday. Two particular agents, John Lounsbury and Wesley Spears, gave recruitment a whole new meaning. Lounsbury estimated that he gave Camby more than $40,000 in cash and gifts over a two year period. Lounsbury bought stereo equipment and took out rental cars for the prized college recruit. Meanwhile, Spears took it one step further; in addition to funneling cash to Camby, Spears bought the star expensive jewelry and even procured prostitutes with whom Camby slept. Furthermore, both agents showered Camby's friends and family with gifts, praise, and support in hopes of getting deeper into Camby's circle (For a more detailed account of the Camby scandal, read this great article by Sports Illustrated's Phil Taylor).

While I do not condone these actions, I acknowledge the temptations that athletes and agents face, especially considering how easy it is to escape persecution. Camby did not come from a well-to-do background and admittedly used his talents to leverage financial security. If, for just one second, we remove ourselves from our own lives/situations and try to imagine growing up in Camby's shoes, or Bush's shoes, perhaps we can see what these athletes dealt saw. Camby had an opportunity to live a lifestyle he had only dreamt of, and if executed correctly, he could do so without penalty. And that's exactly what Camby did. On the court, he set individual records, won player of the year awards, and led his team to the Final Four. Off the court, he took the money, jewelry, cars, and women and lived like no other student in the country. And when all was said and done, he was drafted, received a huge signing bonus, and collected much more in his NBA career. But here's the catch:  He did so at no cost to himself. Sure, the NCAA eventually nullified the Minutemen's visit to the Final Four, but who did that hurt more, the program or Camby? Well, since Camby's departure, UMass has only made the NCAA tournament twice in thirteen years. Meanwhile, Camby has had a moderately successful 14-year career highlighted by winning Defensive Player of the Year in 2007 and his current $9.15 million/year contract. I would say Camby came out ahead.

As for the agents involved, both have since left the sports representation business. However, had they wanted to remain in it, they would have been able to do so. Agents simply are not punished for providing benefits to college players. In fact, according to Jack Bechta, in this article, plenty of high-profile agents provide benefits to players but the NFL Players Association is hesitant to discipline them because those are the same agents that represent them! So, if agents can discreetly provide improper benefits to college athletes then later remain certified by professional leagues, why would they stop?

The solution to this ubiquitous problem is a coordinated, proactive effort by both the NCAA and the NBA/NFL. Here are some policies they should enact:

1.  Ban the Agents

Any current, certified NBA/NFL agent found to be providing a collegiate athlete with improper benefits should be decertified and banned from future representation in that league. Simple. And if you are an aspiring agent who is discovered to be providing improper benefits to a college player, then you should be banned from even applying for professional certification by the NBA/NFL. If the agents are truly the bad apples in all of this, as coaches seem to think, then they should be kept out of the leagues for good. Do not reward agents who tamper with college athletes!

2.  Jeopardize the Athletes

Any collegiate athlete found to be receiving improper benefits from an agent should be immediately kicked off his athletic team, banned from future participation in NCAA athletics at any level, and prevented from entering the NFL/NBA Draft (Although they can enter the league through free agency). The reason why kids make these decisions is because they know that their futures cannot be jeopardized, only the short-term (For instance, they lose one year of playing eligibility). By kicking them off the team, banning them from NCAA athletics, and forbidding them from entering the NFL/NBA Draft, you send a clear message that should athletes decide to receive improper benefits, they directly harm their own futures. If an athlete can no longer play his sport, he cannot showcase his talent. If he cannot showcase his talent, he will not be a prized possession. If he is not a prized possession, the chances of receiving a big payday is slim; not to mention, if you cannot enter the Draft, you will not collect the huge signing bonuses automatically given to high picks). These kids need to understand that stupid decisions in the present will have drastic ramifications in the future. After all, isn't that true in every other walk of life? Why are athletics any different?

3.  Hire the Family/Friends

The NCAA and the NBA/NFL should PAY the parents/friends of high-profile college athletes to serve as informants (aka snitches) to help crackdown on renegade agents. Ah, the icing on the cake! The biggest problem in these scandals is patrolling the athletes' friends and families, right? After all, USC could have done everything in its power to keep Bush away from agents (on-campus housing, closed practices, etc.) but could it have policed Bush's parents miles away from campus? It's a helpless cause. So, then, if you can't beat them, join them! Team up with the parents, secretly, to weed out the rogue agents! And make sure to pay parents/friends on a commission-basis to encourage proactive snitching! This is brilliant.

Ultimately, I don't know if the system will ever be immune to agent-athlete corruption. But as of today, the system leaves itself astonishingly vulnerable. Hopefully, policymakers will see the light and realize that the only way to limit the corruption is to implement regulations like the three that I provide above.