Friday, September 20, 2013

As You Can Tell, I Don't Like the NCAAs Rules

As times goes on, advancements in technology and culture are made.  Another thing that has noticeably changed in the last couple decades is the extent to which athletes from high school to professionals are training.  I won’t try to say that the all-stars of yesterday were not completely dedicated to their respective sports and that’s why they’ve achieved success.  What I will say, however, is that the athletes of today are coming into the college and professional ranks as physical freaks and specimen.  This can be attributed to the fact that children today see athletes put on a much higher pedestal today than in the past due to the prevalence of the media around sports.  Because of this, people are spending absurd amounts of time dedicating themselves to the field, weight room, rink and what have you.  In addition to scholarship money, I don’t think that universities should be allowed to pay their athletes.  But what I do think is that college athletes should be able to receive money for small things they can do that are forbidden by the NCAA today.
            The entire sports community has been put on notice of every single step in the career of Heisman award winner and Texas A&M quarterback Johnathan Manziel, also known as “Johnny Football”.  In the saga that is Johnny’s collegiate experience was one major story that blew up in early August of 2013.  Johnny Manziel was being investigated just before the season began for allegedly selling his autograph to an eBay dealer who would then sell autographed memorabilia for a profit.  The uninformed may see nothing wrong with this situation, but the NCAA defines amateurism by not allowing “contracts with professional teams, salary for participating in athletics, play with professionals, benefits from an agent or prospective agent” and other similar rules.  Essentially the NCAA does not want their student athletes receiving benefits (money) due to any success or notoriety they may experience on the field of play.
 Prior to this year, the NCAA could sell shirts and jerseys with the names of student athletes on them for profit, certainly near $100 for an authentic jersey.  In past years, the NCAA has subtly said that it is okay for them to make enormous profits off of their NCAA athletes but that a player cannot sign a picture of himself and receive even a penny for it.  Accordingly, after the Manziel investigation the NCAA removed licensed apparel of member schools from their official fan shop, so to avoid the hypocrisy that seems to linger with them in many cases.  As an NCAA Division III athlete last year, I could’ve signed a hat for a fan and if I even received something as insignificant as a piece of chocolate soon after from the same person, I could technically be investigated by the NCAA.  Student athletes barely even own their own signatures. They only own them to the extent that they can sign an honor code statement before a test.  The fact that athletes like Johnny Manziel cannot benefit in any way from having the kind of outbreak season that he had is ridiculous. 

Students should be able to make all the money that they can as athletes.  Not necessarily through agents and the like, but rather through selling autographs and memorabilia.  It’s only fair when they worked to earn every bit of fame and popularity that they have.  Babe Ruth made his ascent to fame on a diet of beer and hot dogs, that wouldn’t fly in the ultra-competitive environment that we see in college athletics today.  Student athletes devote most of their days to their sport and deserve to be recognized and rewarded as such.  The NCAA needs to maintain amateurism as part of their corporation but the least that they could do is loosen the restrictions on student athletes receiving benefits.

3 comments:

  1. I agree with you on the fact that the rules these days on athletes can be a little ridiculous if not downright stupid. The fact that students put their lives into doing what they love to do shouldn't stop them from earning money, even in the little parts. All I can really say is that times have changed, sometimes I think for the worse for student athletes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is totally off topic, but I LOVE your background! Anyways, now on to the main point.. This is one of your editorials!! I read it today and it's kind of funny reading it again! I feel like I shouldn't say much because I made comments on your paper and then wrote you a paragraph. Wouldn't want to spoil the surprise hehe!! This is a very interesting topic you presented, and an argument that I haven't heard before. I like it!

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a hot topic in college sports today and you did a great job of explaining your points. In the past, I've agreed with the NCAA, but I'm moving more and more to your side as I read various articles or blogs such as this one. I think the NCAA doesn't want athletes benefiting from their name because it is unfair to the other students at their school. There are people at all universities that are talented at music, art, research, and many other things other than sports who probably never get asked for an autograph. Like I said, I'm torn on this topic right now so time will tell.

    ReplyDelete