Is it a good idea to pay the college athlete?
SportsEarlier this year, as college basketball season drew to a close, millions of fans watched Virginia Commonwealth’s (VCU) Cinderella dreams, and then Butler, falter under the pressure of better talent. In the end, Connecticut, a longtime roundball powerhouse, cut the nets in Houston and gave their 68-year-old coach, Jim Calhoun, his third championship.
For Calhoun, the celebration was the culmination of a difficult season, in which his Huskies finished ninth in the Big East. After more than thirty years as a coach, Calhoun could probably live another season with a ninth-place finish, but his reputation was further tarnished by charges of recruit tampering within his program, which turned out to be true, resulting in a three game fight. Suspension for the next year.
But Calhoun almost didn’t stick around for the next season. His contract with U. Conn paid him a handsome $2.3 million salary in 2010-2011, plus additional millions of thousands in bonuses. Calhoun is a rich man and Hall of Famer who probably didn’t need to face the embarrassment of watching someone else coach his team next year.
However, his base salary paled in comparison to the $3.8 million paid to Kentucky’s John Calipari or the $3.575 million paid to Florida’s Billy Donovan. In fact, all three men were poor next to Louisville’s Rick Pitino, who made more than $7.5 million this year, mostly due to a $3.6 million bonus he earned for… wait for it… completing three years of his contract. There’s another $3.6 million waiting for him in 2014, assuming he can just do his job.
It was newsworthy when VCU’s Shaka Smart saw his salary quadruple from 325K to 1.3 million over eight years, but in reality, his salary would still be less than 26 NCAA tournament coaches.
Oh yeah, this doesn’t necessarily count the money coaches make from “camps,” shoe deals, and TV and radio shows.
Basketball coaches are not alone. Many football coaches enjoy seven-figure salaries, free country club memberships, courtesy cars, use of the college plane, and more to walk on the sidelines of proud football schools like Michigan and Ohio State. In an ironic true story, Buckeye coach Jim Tressel and several of his players came under the watchful eye of the NCAA sanctioning committee when it became known that the players could have sold memorabilia for as much as…wait for it. again… $2,500.
Oh Mother of Pearl, humanity!!!
For what it’s worth, a university that can produce a football team worthy of making one of the five BCS bowls can rake in almost $20 million.
One of the best movies ever made on this subject is the underrated 1994 “Blue Chips,” starring Nick Nolte, with Shaq and Penny Hardaway playing two of the recruited players on a clean show that got dirty after one season. 15-17 in the fictional “Western”. U”. In one memorable scene, a disgruntled Nolte, as Coach Pete Bell, leaves his watering hole after the appearance of “Happy”, a crooked sponsor and “friend of the show” who has been selected to ensure that all three recruits de Nolte get what they want. As Bell berates Happy in the parking lot for buying players for Western programs, an equally disgusted Happy (JT Walsh) responds with a yell that rings even today. “We owe you, Coach… WE OWE IT!!”
But we?
In theory, I am disgusted by the disparity between what coaches and players receive for their participation in a successful college program. Trainers like Calipari and Pitino seem to leave their trail of destruction at every stop. Calipari has been to the Final Four three times, but the first two were vacated after NCAA violation allegations were found to be true. West Virginia’s Bob Huggins left the University of Cincinnati after a DUI charge, and it was later rumored that none of his players graduated.
How does the NCAA respond? By stating that players receive free tuition, books, as well as room and board. Period. As Sally Jenkins cleverly pointed out in a recent Washington Post article, there’s more. Players receive “world-class professional training, the showcase in front of potential employers, the medical attention, the free gear from head to toe Nike or Adidas, the luxurious travel and nice hotel rooms…” You could also add the collectible souvenirs (such as those sold by Ohio State players) and, in the case of a BCS football game, bags filled with watches and other knick-knacks.
Originally, I was all in favor of paying college athletes, but Jenkins’s article made me think more deeply. It costs $25-40K a year to attend most of the schools in question, since many of the players are from out of state. Athletic equipment is worth thousands of dollars a year (meaning, basketball players can expect a new $150 pair of sneakers every month, never mind the sweatshirts and other gear). And you can bet the U. Conn’s and Ohio State’s of the world aren’t sending their players to the Super 8 to rest up for a big game. Their hotels should include plenty of space for the high-flying, high-stakes alumni who carry their vast wealth from city to city to follow their team. Talk about a networking opportunity?
Here is the other problem. We are talking about two sports. Women’s basketball is close to becoming the third and completing the trifecta, but I’ll wait and see what happens after Pat Summitt and Geno Auriemma retire. Of the two sports, not all enjoy the gains. It was interesting to see point deduction charges filed against a sports betting business that was colluding with the University of San Diego basketball team. I don’t recall the USD being on the national radar before this.
Problem number two. Most college athletic programs don’t make money. Even with football considered the largest source of income, only about a dozen of the 117 Division IA schools (BCS) make a profit. Just doing a quick math check. If 80 players make an additional $25,000 a year, we’re talking about $2 million. Maybe some schools could absorb it, but it would hit the budgets of lower-tier teams. A fair share of the money generated goes to support the swimming, cross-country, water polo and gymnastics programs at many of these schools. Should they lose the $2 million? And where is the dividing line? Is it only male soccer and basketball athletes that make the money? That would make a dent in the major leagues on Title IX, and the next sound you’ll hear is lawyers beating each other up on their way to courtrooms across America, ready to sue the NCAA.
And lest anyone forget, this is just Division I. Obviously, Division II and III schools would lose even more because they already have to be flexible with financial aid for their athletes.
My own take on the matter is that paying athletes would only widen the gap between schools that have and those that have not, thus erasing the opportunity for us fans to see the rise of a program like Boise State football and the Butler’s basketball. Of course, with the NCAA Executive Committee running things, the concept of paying athletes will never come to fruition. Less money for the big shots. That’s probably why we don’t have a playoff system in BCS. Unfortunately, the current system is not free of corruption either; otherwise these thoughts would not be discussed as often.