Let college athletes cash in on money they make
Normally, Florida Republicans mock California’s progressive politics.
West Coast laws designed to protect sea turtles and immigrants are met here with disdain.
The Florida GOP, however, wants to follow California’s latest effort to protect one specific group — college athletes.
Last month, California rocked the NCAA by passing a law that says college players can use their own names and images to make money. Basically, the kids can ink endorsement deals.
It means a star recruit for UCLA who earns millions for the school can also earn money for himself by teaming up with Nike or Adidas.
The NCAA scrambled to respond Tuesday by suggesting it might loosen some of its rules.
That’s heresy to those who say it will destroy the purity of college sports.
So on one side, you have Florida Republicans — like Gov. Ron DeSantis — saying through a spokeswoman: “If these athletes are good enough to compete on the field, they’re good enough to compete in the free market.”
On the other, you have Florida sports legends — like FSU great Bobby Bowden — saying: “I am really not for any of that (compensation) because I think it opens it up for people who want to take advantage of it.”
So it’s a battle between Gov. Ron and Coach Bobby.
In this case, I’m on Team Ron.
People who describe college sports as some sort of bastion of amateur purity are, frankly, full of it.
I love college sports. But it’s a $14 billion industry where coaches, schools, networks and merchandisers all cash in. The only ones who don’t are the athletes who bust their humps to make it all happen, and sometimes injure themselves before they can profit professionally.
Opponents claim athletes already receive compensation in the form of a college education and training. I read a Bleacher Report piece that also droned on about “free gear, top-notch coaching, unlimited use of elite athletic facilities.”
Sure. And hotel housekeepers get their own free mop.
All those things are simply a means to an end — and that end is making the NCAA and the schools more money.
And as much as I respect Coach Bowden, it’s eyerollinducing to hear coaches who made millions say others shouldn’t profit off the game.
You want to talk about pureness of sport, I’ll give you my father. He was a volunteer swim coach in high school for nearly 30 years — a man who refused to even take the piddly $250 stipend he was offered and yet rose each day at 4:45 a.m. to coach kids through a 7,000-yard workout before most people opened their eyes. That is altruistic dedication.
Not Clemson coach Dabo Swinney, who makes more than $9 million a year and says his players shouldn’t be able to cash in.
To be fair, there would be some scummy side effects to Florida House Bill 287.
Sure, some mid-level linebacker might score a deal promoting a local pizza place in exchange for $500 and all the pepperoni pies he can eat.
But there will also be big-dollar buyouts.
A booster in Sticksville, USA, who owns a car dealership and has always wanted his Sticksville Stags to excel in basketball might woo a 5-star recruit away from Duke or UNC by offering the player a $1 million endorsement deal at Sticksville Subaru — if he becomes a Stag.
Sketchy? Yes. But the current system is also riddled with scandal and flaws. Players are denied the ability to cash in on their talents — sometimes forever if they don’t have a post-college career.
DeSantis notes athletes are the only ones with this express prohibition. A student who excels in computer programming can find ways to freelance her talents. A songwriter can peddle ditties. But former UCF kicker Donald De La Haye couldn’t profit off a popular YouTube channel that mentioned the Knights.
Said California Gov. Gavin Newsom: “Every single student in the university can market their name, image and likeness; they can go and get a YouTube channel, and they can monetize that. The only group that can’t are athletes.”
With California opening the floodgates, Florida might have to follow suit, simply to keep pace with recruiting.
Florida’s bill says schools can’t ban students “from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.”
Sports debates aside, it’s hard to object to a law that tells a human being they can use their own face, name and talent to the best of their abilities.
Especially since the NCAA runs ads boasting that 98% of its athletes never “go pro.” In other words, they’ll never otherwise have a chance to cash in.
There may be a compromise in the making. Facing backlash, the NCAA took a preliminary vote Tuesday to allow athletes to make money in a manner “consistent with the collegiate model.” We’ll see what that means. The statement was nebulous and full of weasel words.
Still, a compromise might be ideal. Even antipay coaches like Swinney say they support stipends for players and parents.
If the old guard feels pressure, it should.
As Florida’s top House Democrat Kionne McGhee recently said: The current situation sends players to college economics classes where they “are taught about capitalism and taught about the free market but are being told on the other hand that they cannot participate in it.”