10:06am: Talkline with Hoppy Kercheval

Rocky probes college sports

U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller was asking all the right questions during a Commerce Committee meeting on Capitol Hill last week, but he wasn’t getting many answers.

The West Virginia Senator, who is free to say exactly what’s on his mind because he is retiring, wanted to know from NCAA president Mark Emmert how the concept of amateurism in major college sports has become a quaint notion rather than a mission statement.

“Many people believe this notion of college sports (as an avocation, not a profession) is being undermined by the power and influence of money,” Rockefeller said in his opening statement to the committee.  “There’s a growing perception that college athletics—particularly Division I football and basketball—are hardly avocations at all.”

It’s more than a perception; it’s a reality, and Rockefeller addressed his own suspicion by identifying big time college athletics as “highly profitable commercial enterprises.”

Colleges and universities have it both ways when it comes to big time athletics. They enjoy the imprimatur of amateurism and the tax benefits of a non-profit institution of higher education, but also reap huge financial windfalls from media rights, generous athletic donors and sponsor naming rights.

No university charter references the importance of a championship football or basketball team, yet that tail often wags the dog.   These schools, under pressure to produce winning programs the fans will support and major networks will televise, insist that the student participants benefit by getting an education.

But as Rockefeller asked, “Are colleges and universities living up to their end of the bargain and providing them with a quality education?  Are these young athletes entitled to any of the billions of dollars that are reaped from their athletic services?  And when young men and women put their bodies at risk from playing sports for schools—whether its women’s lacrosse or men’s soccer—do they have adequate health insurance?”

Naturally, some dismiss these queries as government meddling.  What, you ask, does the Congress have to do with the Alabama-Auburn game?  As Metronews sports reporter Allan Taylor wrote in a recent commentary, “Here’s a tip for future committee members: Commence lecturing on how to run a business only after you’ve solved the nation’s $680 billion deficit.”

Fair retort, however, it’s also an acknowledgement that big time athletic departments are, in fact, multi-million dollar businesses that happen to be located on college campuses where they get away with underpaying the main attractions—the star athletes.

Also, if Senator Rockefeller and others on Capitol Hill don’t raise these issues, who will?  The schools have too much at stake to have the debate.  The players are starting to get more of a voice, such as Northwestern student athletes’ unionization, but that’s the exception.  The big media voices (ESPN, Fox, etc.) have conflicts of interest because they generate billions by broadcasting the games.

Congress does have a role to play.  It doesn’t have to pass a law or figure out conference realignment, but it can ask, just as Senator Rockefeller did the other day, this question: “Have college sports become a multi-billion dollar commercial enterprise which is no different than any other corporate witnesses who have appeared before this committee?”

An honest answer, which was not forthcoming last week, would more accurately identify big time college sports.  That would be a good place to start the debate.

 





More Hoppy's Commentary

Commentary
Third party and independent presidential candidates rarely get traction in West Virginia
March 28, 2024 - 12:10 am
Commentary
Let's talk about the officiating in the WVU-Iowa game
March 27, 2024 - 12:47 am
Commentary
WVU basketball looks to the future
March 26, 2024 - 12:15 am
Commentary
The things government should not do
March 25, 2024 - 12:20 am


Your Comments