It’s about conscience
This is the follow-up to a previous article where I questioned the Southeast Conference athletic commissioner’s suggestion that football players should receive expense money for their contribution to the football team.
As we prepare for the University of Arkansas 2013 football schedule, the newspapers, television news, specially prepared football magazines and multiple other media outlets are keeping us abreast of the team’s progress.
We are not talking about just our activities on the field this year, but also the recruitment of players for the future.
Hopefully our new coach and his staff will provide us with a competitive and successful team because we all enjoy winning.
However, some of the sports writers are tempering their expectations by pointing out the strength of other SEC teams such as Alabama and Georgia.
Whether we win or lose, we need to applaud these young men who truly become gladiators on Saturdays for our enjoyment.
The question of how to compensate them for their hard work, risk of injury, and talent is the question.
In order to entice the very best high school athletes to play football at the University at Fayetteville rather than at Alabama, Oklahoma, Texas or some other program, how much do we offer them beyond a scholarship?
Is an opportunity for an education too little? For those desiring to compete at a professional level, is a college program that continues to develop one’s abilities beyond those offered in high school enough?
When the best coaches available help the athlete compete in a program that is broadcast to millions of viewers on television is that not a major part of their “compensation”?
So where do we go in the future if we extend expense money to football players?
How does one not provide expense money to the girls’ volleyball team which does not draw the attention or provide the revenue of the football program?
The quality of football played at the University of Arkansas may be better than it was 50 years ago. And, no doubt the facilities provided for the football players has evolved into some of the best in the nation.
My first question, however, is what have we been able to do for the athletes academically? Are the team grade points better? Are we graduating a larger percent of the football players? Are they more successful in their post-graduation jobs than they were 50 years ago? Will expense money bring a better character athlete to the program?
It is easy to point to the millions of dollars the football program provides to the university every year, and that certainly is a benefit to the school as a whole. But, the question is “where do we go from here?”
How do we continue to recruit the top high school football players so we keep winning and maintain the flow of revenue that feeds the system?
Do we risk the integrity of amateur sports to win more football games?
Last year a young freshman at Texas A and M won the Heisman Trophy awarded to the best college football player in the country.
He was in the news for his performance on the football field and now is on the news for his off-field activities.
As a star in the spotlight he gets that super special treatment for his football ability, but there is no mention of his scholarly activities.
He apparently doesn’t need “expense money” beyond a scholarship because it is reported he comes from a wealthy, oil connected, family. Without a football field — in this case the SEC — to perform on he would be just another student at a Texas university.
He needs the university to provide a showcase for his abilities or he would have to quench his dreams of being an NFL quarterback with the potential of multi-million dollar contracts. (The Dallas Cowboys quarterback recently signed a contract reported to be worth $105 million with $55 million of that guaranteed.)
No one denies that not every football player goes to the NFL, but a good college-level football program offers the athlete a chance to show the world what he has to offer both as an athlete and as a person.
A former Razorback named Brandon Burlsworth demonstrated both sides of the opportunity and love of the game.
If one stops for a minute and considers the potential ramifications of giving “expense money” to high school graduates to come to your school to play a sport, all universities will be opening a bidding war beyond an education. And, I do accept the fact that there are already ways the players are given “extra benefits.”
The “no-show jobs” and numerous other means of compensation are not new.
The question in all of this is, who actually has the responsibility for monitoring the activities of these young people in the classroom and outside the athletic world?
There are numerous rumors of some athletes receiving money under the table or selling athletic equipment to raise funds.
We need to recognize the entrepreneurial bent in this, but my concern is their lack of guidance as young people who need mentors from whom they can seek advice before they go too far.
Can we provide that direction for them at the college-level if they are recruited with a promise of “expense money”?
Who will set the standard for how much each athlete receives? Do first team members receive more than bench warmers?
Will Alabama give more expense money than other SEC schools?
It is difficult to recall how many young men I have seen influenced by adults over the years to the detriment of the young person.
Whether in the military or the business community, young people need leadership that desires to help them realize the opportunities in front of them and grow into responsible adults.
If people idolize them for the wrong, frequently selfish, reason, they can affect their entire futures. This is not about “expense money” to keep them in school.
It’s about the conscience of the SEC leadership.
••• Editor’s note: Leo Lynch is an award-winning columnist. He is a native of Benton County has deep roots in northwest Arkansas. He is a retired industrial engineer and former Justice of the Peace. He can be contacted at prtnews@nwaonline.com. The opinions of the writer are his own, and are not necessarily those of The Times.