4 Reasons Fans Should Read Senator Murphy’s Reports on the College Sports Industry

Senator Chris Murphy College Athletics Report

The start of the college football season is rapidly approaching. College sports fans are eager to cheer for their favorite teams in hopes that their team will qualify for a bowl game or make it to the College Football Playoffs. In the midst of the excitement of the upcoming football season, is the debate of whether college athletes should be further compensated. United States Senator Chris Murphy, of Connecticut, has authored two reports highlighting the injustices of the college athletics system. In the reports, Senator Murphy acknowledges the injustices of the college sports system as the rights issue that it is.

The current college sports system no doubt needs restructuring. The numerous academic fraud scandals and the NCAA rule violation scandals have made it immensely clear that the current system is flawed. Perhaps the most telling example of the need for change is the college basketball scandal that resulted in an FBI investigation and a criminal trial.

Change is Coming to College Athletics

Several state and federal legislators have introduced bills aiming to compensate college athletes in some way. One bill that is making serious headway is a bill in California entitled the Fair Pay to Play Act. The bill seeks to give college athletes in California the ability to profit from their name, image, and likeness by enabling them to garner endorsements. One may wonder why the issue of compensating college athletes is getting the attention of so many lawmakers. The issue is getting that attention because the issue of fairly compensating college athletes is a civil rights issue.

College athletes are being exploited. Everyone involved in big-time college athletics is getting rich except the athletes. Yes, college athletes receive an invaluable scholarship in return for their academic services. However, not all college athletes are able to get the most out of their academic opportunity. Many leave school without a degree and without an opportunity to complete their degree in the future. Many who do graduate, do not receive a degree in a worthwhile major.

Senator Chris Murphy Report

Senator Murphy released his first report entitled Madness Inc., How Everyone is Getting Rich off College Sports – Except the Players in March of 2019. He was prompted to write the report after he witnessed the unfortunate knee sprain injury Zion Williamson suffered when his Nike shoe fell apart during the Duke v. UNC game in February. Senator Murphy stated that Williamon’s injury for him “was the starkest example of a kid making lots of adults super-rich, who almost had his career ended without making a single dime.”

Late July, Senator Murphy released his second report. The report is entitled, Madness Inc. How Colleges Keep Athletes on the Field and out of the Classroom. The second report highlighted the reality of the “world-class education” that college athletes are supposed to receive in return for their athletic services. Both of Senator Murphy’s reports show that college athletes are not getting as good of a bargain as many may think. For that reason, every college sports fan should read Senator Murphy’s reports. Here are four takeaways from the reports that all college sports fans should know.

1. Proportionally Coaches Receive More of the Revenue than the Athletes

The first report highlights the stark imbalance between the revenue that college athletes generate and the amount of money that is actually filtered back down to them. The annual amount spent on student aid is $936 million, while $1.2 billion is spent on coaches salaries. There are 45,000 college athletes in schools that make up the Power 5 conferences and only 4,400 coaches. There are 65 Power 5 conference programs. Only 12 percent of all revenue goes to student-athlete scholarships, while 16 percent goes towards coaches salaries. In effect, the coaches receive more of the revenue than the athletes. This is not to say that coaches do not deserve to be compensated for their work, because they do. However, should they be compensated in greater proportion to the college athletes?

2. Spending on Lavish Facilities is out of Control and Provides no Long Term Benefit to the Athletes

Many schools have invested in overly extravagant and lavish facilities for their athletic programs. The report highlights the facilities at Clemson University (Clemson) and the University of South Carolina (South Carolina). Clemson built a $55 million facility that boasts a miniature golf course, movie theater, and bowling lanes. South Carolina’s facility has a video arcade and a sound studio for athletes to record their music. The most recent example of an overly lavish facility can be seen at Louisiana State University (LSU). LSU recently unveiled the $28 million renovations they made to their football operations building.

From the above picture and the aforementioned amenities, it is clear that spending on facilities has gotten out of control. How does a $55 million dollar building make an athlete better at their sport or in the classroom? Perhaps the athletes enjoy the facility a little while they are in college (if their strict schedules allow). However, there is no discernible long term benefit access to such facilities provides to the athletes once they leave college and begin their careers.

3. College Athletes are not Getting the Valuable Education that Everyone Thinks They are Getting

While many college athletes do receive a quality education, some do not. Many college athletes are not receiving the academic advantages that the general public is led to believe they are. Senator Murphy’s second report highlighted the story of Stephen Cline a former defensive lineman for Kansas State University. Cline wished to become a veterinarian but was forced into a less demanding major so that he could focus on football. The NCAA sells education as the bargain that college athletes get in exchange for their athletics services. However, many do not get it.

So many athletes are like Cline and are not encouraged to major in the subject of their true interest so that they may focus on their sport. Not everyone truly cares about the value of the education athletes receive. This was made abundantly clear when the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (UNC) sham course scandal was exposed. The NCAA chose not to sanction UNC, thereby showing their true commitment to ensuring each college athlete receives a world-class education.

4. When Examined Closely, it is Clear that College Athletes act as Full-Time Employees

The daily life of a college athlete is more akin to that of a full-time employee than a full-time student. Many college athletes are up at 5:00 am to report to 6:00 am practice, then to breakfast, then to class, then to another class. Before the athlete realizes it, it is time for a team meeting – another athletic-related activity. Hopefully, the athlete has some time to squeeze a shower and get some lunch in between. College athletes no doubt keep a rigorous schedule. 

Senator Murphy’s report highlighted a study conducted by the PAC 12 conference in 2015. The study found that college athletes averaged more than 50 hours per week on athletic-related activities. The report also highlighted the Northwestern University football team’s hearing with the National Labor Relations Board. During the hearing, the athletes revealed that they spent upwards of 60 hours a week on football-related activities. College athletes fulfill all of these obligations before they have had any time to think about their coursework. 

In order to be a full-time student, college athletes must be enrolled for at least 12 credit hours per semester. For each credit hour, students are expected to spend two to three hours outside of class studying. This means that students are expected to spend between 36-48 hours per week studying. How is a college athlete supposed to spend 48 hours per week studying and roughly 40 hours per week on athletics and be successful at both? 

Senator Chris Murphy’s Report Emphasizes that Fairly Compensating College Athletes is a Civil Rights Issue

As the college football season begins, college sports fans should take some time to read Senator Chris Murphy’s reports. Upon reading the reports,  they will better understand why there has been a surge in state and federal legislative involvement in ensuring equitable compensation for college athletes. Fans will realize that the debate is not just about money. It is about the restoration of civil rights to college athletes. Everyone should be able to profit from their own name, image, and likeness. College athletes generate billions of dollars each year for the NCAA, their school, and their conferences. College athletes should have a more equitable piece of that pie.

Why Is Paying College Athletes Viewed so Negatively by Some Fans?

Paying College Athletes Duke Zion Williamson NCAA

Many college sports fans support amateurism. They support it even when it defies all manners of common sense and logic. This was seen in various fans’ reactions to the injury that freshmen phenom Zion Williamson suffered in the UNC/Duke game on February 20, 2019. Leading up to and during that game, fans witnessed the sham […]

Continue reading

What Happens if California Calls the NCAA’s Bluff of Post Season Bans?

California NCAA post season ban is the bill becomes law

The NCAA has once again shown its true objective. That objective is ensuring that college athletes do not receive any financial benefit that is not NCAA approved. On June 24th, it was reported that NCAA president Mark Emmert sent a letter to the California State Assembly. The letter informed the California State Legislature that the NCAA may ban California colleges from participating in NCAA championships if The Fair Pay to Play Act is passed. The Act aims to allow college athletes to profit from the commercial use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL).

That is right, the NCAA seeks to punish California schools if the state passes a law that would benefit college athletes. The bill was proposed by California state senators Nancy Skinner and Steven Bradford in February. Last month, the California State Senate passed the bill. It is very likely that the bill will continue to pass through the California Sate Legislature and become law. This high probability led the NCAA to send that letter in an attempt to impede the bill’s progress.

What Happens if the Bill Becomes Law in California?

If the bill is signed into law, it will not go into effect until 2023. At that time, college athletes in California would be allowed to garner endorsement deals and sign with agents. The schools would not be paying the athletes. The athletes would get paid from outside sources. Therefore, the bill does not pose any Title IX implications. It also will have no effect on non-revenue producing sports. However, the NCAA wants the bill’s progress postponed until their working group has had a chance to address the matter.

The NCAA Creates Working Group to Address Issues Related to College Athletes’ NIL

On May 14th, the NCAA announced that it created a working group to address issues regarding college athletes’ ability to profit from the commercial use of their NIL. The NCAA created this working group in response to several bills, similar to the one in California, being introduced at both the state and federal levels. A bill was introduced in Washington state that aims to allow college athletes in Washington to profit from the commercial use of their NIL. At the federal level, Congressman Mark Walker of North Carolina introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act. The Act purports to amend the tax code so that amateur sports organizations such as the NCAA can no longer strip athletes of their right to profit from their name, image, and likeness. 

In an effort to get ahead of the issues raised in these bills, the NCAA created the working group. Many were skeptical of the actual goals of the working group. Many questioned whether the NCAA would actually amend the rules in a favorable manner for college athletes. The letter the NCAA sent to the California State Legislature has painted a bleak picture for any hope that the NCAA will make rule changes that benefit college athletes in a meaningful way. After all, the NCAA recently announced that it may tighten up on college athletes’ ability to transfer.

Last summer, the NCAA passed a new transfer rule that served as a major benefit to many college athletes by allowing them to be immediately eligible upon transfer. After complaints about college athletes newfound freedom, the NCAA announced that it may be issuing tighter guidelines for schools to consider in determining an athlete’s immediate eligibility. The NCAA’s announcement regarding the transfer rule does not leave much hope for the efforts of the working group. However, what the working group will actually do remains to be seen. In the meantime, California should call the NCAA’s bluff and move forward with the progression of the bill. After all, how likely is it that the NCAA will carry out its threat?

Will the NCAA Make Good on its Threat?

California is home to some of college sports premier programs. Stanford, University of California Los Angeles, and the University of Southern California all have renowned sports programs. These schools are also members of the Power 5 Conference, the Pac 12. The Pac-12 Conference would be directly affected if the NCAA makes good on its threat. However, the Pac-12 seems to support the efforts of the NCAA’s working group. The Unafraid Show reached out the Pac-12 Conference for comments regarding The Fair Pay to Play Act and Mark Emmert’s letter.

The Pac-12 responded with a letter that the conference’s commissioner Larry Scott sent to the chairman of the California State Legislature Arts, Entertainment, Sports, Tourism, and Internet Media Committee on June 14, 2019. The Pac-12’s letter was sent to the California State Legislature prior to the report of NCAA president Mark Emmert’s letter. In the Pac-12’s letter, Mr. Scott requested that the committee hold the bill until the NCAA’s working group finalizes its work this fall. The letter stated Pac-12 athletic director Rick George of the University of Colorado, Boulder joined the committee. Mr. Scott also stressed the Pac-12’s commitment to protecting and supporting the welfare of student-athletes. The Pac-12 Conference did not comment on Mark Emmert’s letter.

It is Time for Change in College Athletics

Although the Pac-12 would prefer the California State Legislature postpone the bill, the California State Legislature should do just the opposite. The California State Legislature should call the NCAA’s bluff. California is home to some of college sports premier programs. Does it really make sense that the NCAA would prohibit all of California’s colleges from competing in championships? The NCAA has too much to lose. The organization has its broadcasting deal with CBS Sports and Turner a division of Time Warner to consider. Would the NCAA really risk losing money on that deal by not making the California colleges’ games available? The answer is no. The NCAA did not become a billion dollar non-profit organization by missing opportunities to maximize their profit margin. After all, if the NCAA did not punish UNC for creating sham courses why would the NCAA punish California for passing a law that benefits college athletes? Therefore, California should call the NCAA’s bluff and continue to fight for what is right.

California should set an example by passing The Fair Pay to Play Act. It is very likely that other states would follow suit for competitive reasons if nothing else.

The NCAA has shown time and again that their aim is to prohibit the financial benefits of college athletes as much as possible in the name of amateurism. Amateurism is a sham. That has been proven by the exorbitant coaching contracts that are signed year after year. The NCAA will only authorize changes in college athletics when forced to. They only created the working group after several state and federal bills were introduced and gaining traction. California should call the NCAA’s bluff and continue to push the bill through. At the very least, California could force the working group to amend the rules so that college athletes can finally profit from the commercial use of their own face and name.

Follow Kassandra Ramsey @Court_2_Court

HTH: Le’Veon Bell Robbed Naked, Jake Mangum, NBA Draft Underclassmen

Leveon Bell gets robbed by naked women, Jake Magnum Mississippi St Baseball, NBA Draft

Three recent robberies have made the news recently, and we must address them. Le’Veon Bell got robbed. Mississippi State player Jake Mangum pointed out the fact that NCAA baseball coaches and players are being robbed. College Basketball underclassmen are being robbed of their draft and educational opportunities by declaring for the NBA draft too early.

#1 Le’Veon Bell had a Sleepover with His Robbers

Le’Veon Bell just got heisted for $520k in jewelry. But thieves in the night? Nope. By two women, his “girlfriends” as he referred to them. The best part about this is when police asked for a description of what the suspects were wearing, he told the police he didn’t know because he left them naked in his bed. Come on man. Now I’m not here to judge his threesome or whatever. But he needs to have some common sense. You can’t just leave strangers in your house with all of your stuff. This is a major blow considering he didn’t get paid last year.

#2 The NCAA is Robbing College Baseball Players and 3rd Assistant Coaches

https://twitter.com/courtkrobb/status/1141927023008473090

Jake Mangum of Mississippi State recently brought up yet another NCAA grievance. Baseball has a third assistant coach that is unpaid. They get a university email, phone number, and role, but no pay. This is absurd. At least shell out a stipend for room and board. For an organization that makes millions upon millions, they are slow to pay those that bring value. It’s the same for athletes. Of 35 players on each team, only 11.7 scholarships are dispersed. Just like congress continued to drag their feet over paying the heroes of 911 (thank you Jon Stewart for bringing awareness and accountability), the NCAA always avoids paying their players.

#3 Underclassmen in the NBA Draft are Being Robbed

Who is advising these underclassmen to leave early and enter the NBA Draft? Now, I’m not talking about the lottery picks. I’m talking about good, not great players. There are so many of these players that are likely to go undrafted and end up in the G League or overseas. They need to stay another year or two, gain experience and perfect their skills. Teams have more money invested in higher draft picks and give them a longer leash to live up to expectations. But, if these athletes don’t get drafted, they should be allowed to go back to college and play. The NCAA and a new NBA CBA need to allow this. Don’t make them lose out on chances for education, maturity, and careers. Give them another shot. It’s too easy for broke college students to bite on the prospect of an NBA contract.

Compensation and Education: Launch of the Historical Basketball League

historical basketball league cities map compensation and education
compensation and education HBL map

The Historical Basketball League who’s aim is to focus on compensation and education announced the following eight cities for the launch of the league’s inaugural season set to take place in June 2020:

  • Atlanta, Georgia
  • Baltimore, Maryland
  • Charlotte, North Carolina
  • Raleigh, North Carolina
  • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  • Norfolk, Virginia
  • Richmond, Virginia
  • Washington, DC

Focusing on the east coast with the intent to expand to other parts of the United States in the near future, the HBL seeks to challenge the NCAA-model by offering top players the opportunity to earn compensation while also obtaining a college degree. The HBL will offer players up to $150,000 based on their market value and will assist each player “in building a personal and professional brand that will extend on and off the court.”

Promoting Personal Brands Through Use of Name, Image, and Likeness

The NCAA Board of Governors Federal and State Legislation Working Group was created to analyze proposed federal and state legislation and determine whether student-athletes may receive benefits (i.e. compensation) based on the use of their name, image, and likeness. The NCAA provided the committee with a strict mandate: (i) potential benefits must be tied to education, and (ii) no models that could be perceived as “pay-for-play” may be considered.

These guidelines make it virtually impossible for student-athletes to receive benefits in exchange for the use of their likeness. However, California’s bill (and other states) should force the NCAA to loosen up its parameters. In the meantime, there are a number of ways the HBL can help build player brands through increased fan engagement and other means that could also benefit the league.

One platform is INFLCR, a software that allows athletes and teams to deliver personalized content across social media. INFLCR has partnered with a number of universities and athletes to build brands, and the Historical Basketball League could benefit greatly in the promotion and marketing of its product by doing the same.

Another is Gatorade’s “Highlights” app. Though catered to younger athletes to help capture and share athletic feats, Gatorade’s app provides another great branding tool and way for athletes to control their marketing. Users can brand their highlights with their names, numbers, teams or positions. This provides the most popular players with a way to increase their marketability and commercial value.

Historical Basketball League: The Future of College Basketball

The NCAA Basketball corruption case resulted in prison sentences for each of the individuals involved. The universities implicated at trial have resorted to claiming “victim” as a way to alleviate their roles. That stance, coupled with the NCAA’s refusal to take overt investigative action, have some questioning whether corruption in the college ranks will ever be addressed.

HBL’s Andy Schwarz notes that schools violate rules because the value of obtaining a five-star recruit exceeds any punishment the NCAA can provide. This finding emphasizes the HBL’s importance. The recent decisions of RJ Hampton and Kenyon Martin Jr. show athletes are tired of being exploited. The NCAA rules are arbitrary and antiquated, but change is on the horizon. Boasting a management team led by two-time champion David West and an advisory board featuring two individuals with Google-experience, the forward-thinking Historical Basketball Leauge has a real shot of establishing itself as the premier college basketball league for domestic and international talent. The HBL has already begun scouting athletes for its inaugural 2020 Season, identifying potential coaches, and engaging individuals to serve as ambassadors for its respective teams.

Credit: Myles Brand

CEO Ricky Volante often states, “Amateurism is a con,” and that the collegiate model should first benefit the student-athletes, not the coach or institution who profits from their labor. The HBL is coming, and many – including the NCAA – are beginning to take notice of compensation and education.

For more information about the HBL, check out CEO Ricky Volante’s interview with Unafraid Show’s Kassandra Ramsey

Follow Alan Wilmot on Twitter and Instagram @alanwilmotlaw

RJ Hampton Going Pro Basketball May Change College Basketball

RJ hampton turning pro instead of playing college basketball

On Tuesday, the number 5 ranked college basketball recruit in the ESPN Top 100 RJ Hampton, shocked the college sports world when he announced that he would forego college to play professionally in Australia. He made the announcement on ESPN’s Get Up. Hampton will play professionally with the National Basketball League’s (NBL) New Zealand Breakers.

Immediately after Hampton’s announcement, the sports world was abuzz about what this will mean for the NCAA and college basketball. The NCAA, the schools, the conferences, and coaches are facing criticism for the current college sports model where they make billions of dollars while the players are limited to a cost-of-attendance scholarship.

The Current College Sports Model

The current college sports model can be summed up in one word – UNFAIR. The NCAA governs college sports. The NCAA makes rules that it’s member schools follow. The bedrock of those rules is the principle of amateurism. College sports are regarded as amateur sports that the players only engage in for their love the game. Thus, college athletes do not receive any payment but may receive a scholarship. Meanwhile, the NCAA, the schools, the conferences, the coaches, and sports administrators make billions of dollars off of college athlete labor. Does this really seem fair?

No, it is not fair. More and more people are acknowledging the unfairness of the current college sports model particularly in regards to D1 men’s basketball and football. The issue has been litigated in court in several cases. Recently state and federal lawmakers have proposed legislation challenging the college sports model. The bills propose allowing college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. Due to the progress of these proposed bills, the NCAA has created a working group to address the issue. Now, whether Hampton realizes it or not, his decision poses another challenge to the current college sports model. Hampton’s decision could have a detrimental effect on college basketball especially if future top recruits follow in his footsteps.

Will RJ Hampton’s Decision Detrimentally Effect College Basketball

Hampton is the only one of the five top recruits to decide not to play college basketball. From a college basketball fan entertainment perspective his absence is not likely to have a profound effect this upcoming season. College basketball will still be the same product that it has been and fans will surely tune in. However, Hampton’s decision could have an effect on college basketball down the road. This is especially true when considered with the mounting challenges that college sports is rightfully facing.

As the NCAA addresses the proposed legislation and continues to fight in court, the college sports model is also being challenged directly. Specifically, the NBA’s G-Leauge new program presents a competitive problem for college basketball. Last fall, the G-League announced that it would allow elite athletes who are 18 years old to enter the G-League and receive a select contract valued at $125,000.

Furthermore, the NCAA may soon be threatened by a start-up basketball league that seeks to pay its players and give them scholarships. That league is the Historical Basketball League (HBL). Projected to start in 2020, the HBL plans to give it’s players an option where they are not forced to choose between pay and education. These new options and the example set by Hampton may encourage future top recruits to take a non-traditional route to the NBA. If this happens, college basketball may be in for a real change.

Change is Inevitable to the Current College Sports Model

RJ Hampton is not the first player to opt out of college for a professional overseas league. However, his decision is still a big deal. Hampton is a top 5 recruit who chose to “buck the system” and pursue his NBA dream another way. Hampton echoes the sentiment that so many others are thinking. That sentiment is that athletes can always go back to college. However, athletes only have a finite amount of time to make money off their athleticism. Why should athletes be forced to spend that time playing in college for drastically under their fair market value? The answer is they should not.

Hampton’s decision and reasoning has the potential to have a domino effect. Others are likely to follow suit, especially if Hampton makes it to the NBA. Hampton will get paid to play professionally and prepare for the NBA. It is a really attractive option for similarly situated prospects. Given this realization, the NCAA will eventually have to make a change. Hampton’s decision may be even more incentive for the NCAA’s working group to do the right thing and allow college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. One thing is for sure, the current college sports model is going to have to change if it wants to retain elite talent.

Follow Kassandra Ramsey on Twitter @Court_2_Court

NCAA May Be Forced to Pay Players For Their Name, Image, Likeness

College Athletes NCAA Name image Likeness

The NCAA is finally acknowledging the push to allow college athletes to receive pay from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). Both federal and state lawmakers have introduced bills seeking to allow college athletes to profit from their NIL. On May 14, the NCAA shocked college sports fans when they announced their creation of a working group to “examine issues being highlighted in recently proposed federal and state legislation related to student-athletes’ name, image, and likeness.”

With this announcement, the NCAA acknowledged the growing support for allowing college athletes’ to profit from their NIL. Some of the efforts have made quite a bit of progress. However, will the NCAA’s acknowledgment of this issue actually lead to real change that benefits college athletes? Will the NCAA finally do the right thing and allow college athletes to finally receive some of the benefits that their skills provide to so many coaches and college sports administrators?

College Athletes Give up the Right Profit From NIL When They Agree to Play

One may wonder why such legislation is even necessary. It would seem that people would automatically receive compensation for the use of their name, image, or likeness. However, that is not the case for college athletes. College athletes are prohibited from profiting from the use of their name, image, or likeness. Those who violate the rules risk losing their eligibility. College athletes have been suspended something as simple as signing an autograph. In 2013, Johnny Manziel was suspended for doing just that.

The ability of college athletes to profit from their NIL was addressed in federal court in O’bannon v. NCAA. While the case made some progress for college athletes, it did not result in blanket allowance of NIL compensation. Both federal and state lawmakers around the country have acknowledged the injustice of precluding college athletes from such compensation while the NCAA and its member schools generate billions of dollars each year from college sports.

Will the NCAA’s Working Group Result in NIL Compensation

Will the NCAA’s working group result in NIL compensation for college athletes? Initially, it would seem that the NCAA will do what it always does. That is, find a way to avoid allowing college athletes to receive any compensation in the name of maintaining its farce of “amateurism.” Afterall in the press release, the NCAA stated that the working group would be focused on “maintain[ing] the clear demarcation between professional and college sports.”

Allowing college athletes to profit from their NIL would certainly blur that line. College athletes would be able to sign endorsement deals similar to professional athletes. However, it is hard to imagine that it would blur the line any more than the billion-dollar broadcasting deal the NCAA has with CBS Sports and Tuner, a division of Time Warner already has. It clearly benefits the NCAA and college sports administrators for things to remain as they are. However, the creation of the working group signals that fact that the NCAA realizes that it needs to act before it is forced to act. The NCAA could be forced to act soon.

California Legislation Could Really Become Law: NCAA Athletes Pay

About a week after the NCAA made its announcement, the Fair Pay to Play Act in California took a giant leap forward. The California Senate voted 31-4 to pass the bill.

The bill is headed to the state Assembly for further consideration. The bill seeks to allow college athletes to hire agents and profit from their NIL by 2023. The Fair Pay for Play Act will make it illegal for California colleges to punish college athletes for receiving compensation for their name, image, and likeness. If this Act makes it through the state Assembly, the NCAA would be forced to change its rules, at least for colleges in California.

The Federal Legislation Could Affect the NCAA’s Non-profit Status

In March, Congressman Mark Walker of North Carolina introduced the Student-Athlete Equity Act. If signed into law, the act will make the NCAA’s status as a non-profit contingent on the NCAA allowing college athletes to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness. It is about time the NCAA be forced to actually do something to warrant still being considered a non-profit. The Act is currently under review by the House Ways and Means Committee. If this bill becomes law, the NCAA will have to change its rules for colleges nationwide.

The NCAA may Enact Change Given the Progress of the Proposed Legislation

Considering the progress of the Fair Pay for Play Act and the Student-Athlete Equity Act, the NCAA may actually feel forced to revise its rules. In an effort to avoid being told what to do, the NCAA may revise their rules to allow college athletes to receive some compensation. Furthermore, 2020 democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang believes that is time to pay college athletes. He plans to make the issue apart of his campaign. Here again, a politician is taking a stance against the NCAA’s exploitive system. The issue of paying college athletes is going to continue to grow. With that realization, the NCAA may actually revise its rules in order to maintain its control.

Follow Kassandra Ramsey on Twitter @Court_2_Court

Dabo Swinney’s $93M Contract Proves College Athletes Can Be Paid

Dabo Swinney $93M contract There's enough money to pay the players

The myth that there is not enough money to pay the college athletes has been debunked once again! Last week, Clemson University made its football coach, Dabo Swinney, the highest paid coach in college football. The record-breaking contract will pay Swinney $93 million dollars over the next ten years. That is an average of $9.3 million dollars a year. Swinney’s deal beats Nick Saban’s contract with The University of Alabama that pays him $74 million over eight years. It also beats Jimbo Fisher’s contract with Texas A&M that pays him $75 million dollars over ten years.

Just under them is Jim Harbaugh (Michigan), Gus Malzhan (Auburn), and Kirby Smart (Georgia) each averaging $7 million per year. Even with these impressive salaries, people still argue that there is not enough money to pay college athletes. When coaches salaries and television deals for college football and basketball are considered, it is hard to fathom how people can continue to make this argument.

Why do People Still Buy The “Not Enough Money Argument?”

People continue to buy into that argument because they listen to words of coaches like Dabo Swinney. Swinney denounced paying college athletes in a statement where he alluded that doing so would give college athletes a sense of entitlement.

“We try to teach our guys, use football to create the opportunities, take advantage of the platform and the brand and the marketing you have available to you. But as far as paying players, professionalizing college athletics, that’s where you lose me. I’ll go do something else, because there’s enough entitlement in this world as it is.”

In reality, the only people that seem to be entitled is the coaches and the NCAA. They seem to be entitled to having young predominantly black talent perform their talents for essentially free. These athletes do this while receiving a scholarship and being precluded from receiving any other unsanctioned benefit.

While a scholarship is valuable, it pails in comparison to the benefits the coaches, college sports administrators, and NCAA receive. However, that is the paradox of the NCAA’s purported mission and the current college athletics system. Dabo Swinney’s stance on paying college athletes and his new contract is the ultimate demonstration of that paradox.

The Paradox of the Dabo Swinney Contract and the NCAA’s Mission

The NCAA purports to provide college athletes with an opportunity to participate in athletics while pursuing a college degree. The NCAA also purports to keep college athletics distinct from professional athletics. One reason that the NCAA does this is to protect college athletes from exploitation.

In reality, the NCAA has only maintained that distinction in regards to compensation of the labor force. The NCAA has made sure that college athletes do not receive any compensation remotely resembling that of a professional athlete. The NCAA even goes so far as to strip college athletes of their publicity rights preventing them from using their name, image, and likeness, as a condition of participation. Thereby ensuring that college athletes will not receive endorsement opportunities similar to those granted to professional athletes.

However, the NCAA has failed in maintaining a distinction between professional and college athletics in every other way. This evidenced by Swinney’s and other coaches’ contracts and the million dollar television deals. It appears that the NCAA only truly cares about making sure that college athletics is not professionalized to the benefit of the athletes. In reality, the NCAA’s mission and the allowance of contracts like Dabo Swinney’s is really a bit of a paradox. It is a paradox in the fact that the NCAA claims to protect college athletes from exploitation while at the same time allowing their talents to exploited by college sports officials who make millions of dollars from the athletes’ labor.

Perhaps Swinney Would Leave if College Athletes Were Paid

In his statement, Swinney stated that if college sports were professionalized that he would “go do something else.” What he failed to acknowledge is that college sports in already professionalized to his benefit as can be seen in his contract. Perhaps Swinney would go do something else if he was forced to share some of the wealth and coaching college football was no longer a $93 million dollar cash cow. One thing is for sure, there is definitely enough money to pay college athletes.

HTH: James Harden Fan Shame, Durant Won’t Leave Golden State, Transfer Portal

Hot Takes house James Harden fans Kevin Durant GSW NCAA Transfer Portal

The Hot Takes House is on the open for business. It is a compilation of scorching hot opinions that won’t turn into Freezing Cold Takes material. In this edition: James Harden fans are shameless people with character flaws, Kevin Durant would be crazy to leave the Warriors, and the NCAA transfer portal is getting ridiculous. Do not read any further if you are easily triggered. Read. Share. Leave a Comment.

James Harden Fans Have No Shame

I’m not sure how James Harden fans are not embarrassed to call him their favorite basketball player. His ridiculous amount of flopping and his refusal to consistently give defensive effort are shameful. In general, fans like their athletes tough, rugged, and mentally tough. So, I do not understand why so many James Harden apologist exist.

It is so frustrating to try and watch an NBA Playoffs game, but have to suffer through Harden flailing around and faking hurt. By no means is Harden the only NBA player that flops. His serial abuse of flopping is just the most absurd in the league. Harden is strong and built like a tank compared to most players, but he flops whenever players get close to him. Could you imagine Jordan, Kobe, Bird, LeBron, Durant or any other champion doing this?

And then there is Harden’s negligence on defense. The Rockets will NEVER win an NBA championship until he changes his style of play. No team has ever won a championship when their best player gives poor effort on one side of the ball. The producers of ‘Shaqtin A Fool’ could make an entire show about Harden every season.

As a fan, how can you be proud of this? Maybe his fans are just the segment of the population that wants credit and praise for a job performed half right.

Two Reasons Kevin Durant Won’t Leave The Warriors

Assuming the money is right, Kevin Durant would be foolish to leave the Golden State Warriors. So many media and NBA analyst from Ric Bucher, to Chris Broussard have all but guaranteed Durant’s exit from Golden State. I believe that Kevin Durant is too smart to leave GSW.

Easy Basketball: 2019-20 Will be Durant’s 13th season

Players want to play fewer minutes and win more as they get older in the NBA. Durant has never had gotten easier shot attempts or had to carry less of the weight than he does with Curry, Thompson, and Green on the team. In his first nine seasons in Oklahoma City (Seattle), KD faced double teams, played a ton of minutes, worked extremely hard for shots, and only had one chance for a championship. In three seasons with the Warriors, he has a Finals MVP, two NBA Championships, and is making a run at a third. He plays fewer playoff minutes, averages more points, and shoots a higher % from 3, 2-pt, and free throws than OKC.

Durant’s Silicon Valley Investments

Durant has maximized his time in the Bay Area financially. He has started his own venture capital company which has partnered with some Silicon Valley heavyweights. His company reportedly has equity stakes in Rubrick, Acorn, Pieology, and Lime Scooters. Money does travel across state lines, but proximity and relationships matter in business. Warriors majority owner Joseph Lacob made his money in venture capital and mentors Durant in business.

I’m supposed to believe that Kevin Durant, who wants to score, win, and make money will let a couple beefs with Draymond make his life harder? Nah. I don’t buy it.

NCAA Transfer Portal is Getting Out of Control

We have covered the NCAA and its hypocritical and unfair practices extensively on Unafraid Show. I believe the players should have the right to transfer more freely and unencumbered like coaches. However, a lot of these kids are getting bad advice from their inner circles. These kids are transferring at the first sign of adversity. Right now there are nearly 1,000 players who have entered their names in the college football transfer portal. If a player enters his name in the portal, it doesn’t mean a player will transfer, schools can pull the players’ scholarship.

It is nice to say “I played as a true freshman”, but sometimes that adversity that you face by redshirting is the best thing for your growth. These young players need to understand that the push you need to achieve your dreams is often found in the struggle to get there.

Download the Podcast:

The NCAA Twitter Account Keeps Getting Roasted During March Madness

NCAA Twitter keeps taking Losses During March Madness

It is college basketball’s favorite time of year, March Madness! It is also the NCAA’s favorite time of year. The non-profit organization rakes in big bucks from essentially free labor. While the NCAA may be all smiles financially, the organization has endured a public relations nightmare. Since the beginning of March Madness, the NCAA has been subject to some pretty heavy criticism via Twitter.

First, the NCAA faced well-founded criticism due to a commercial depicting a fairytale life for college athletes. The NCAA also faced criticism stemming from two tweets. In one tweet, the NCAA completely disregarded the women’s March Madness tournament. Lastly, the NCAA was criticized for a tweet from 2016. In that tweet, they seemingly boasted providing a benefit to college athletes that should be a given.

College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

The “Student-Athlete” Day in the Life Commercial

The NCAA released a commercial intending to depict a day in the life of a college athlete.

https://youtu.be/9tkhaW94HwY

In the above video, the athlete starts out in bed, goes straight to class, and then to practice. After practice, the athlete mingles with friends before playing in his game. After the game, the athlete studies before winding down to get a good night sleep. The athlete appears to be coasting through his day with no stress and no worries. He appears to have no problem balancing the challenges and responsibilities of being a student with those of being an athlete.

In sum, the commercial depicts a very false narrative of a perfect college athlete life. A life where college athletes maintain the perfect balance between academics, athletics, and social time. Anyone who pays the slightest bit of attention to college athletics knows that the commercial cannot be representative of reality. It logistically does not make sense, especially when just one factor is considered. That factor is travel time for games. The miles between each game simply do not add up.  

The Commercial is not a True Representation

Consider the makeup of the Big 10 Conference. The Big 10 is made up of schools on the East Coast and the Midwest. Maryland and Rutgers are on the East Coast while Nebraska and Wisconsin are in the Midwest. When travel alone time is considered, there is no way that the depiction in the commercial can be accurate. There is no way college athletes are almost always able to leave their game, study, mingle with friends, and get sufficient sleep. This is especially true when early morning training sessions, team meetings, regular practice time, and individual practice time are added to the equation. Individual practice time is necessary to stay on top and earn playing time. Based on these factors alone, there is no way the commercial can be an accurate representation.

College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

The Commercial’s Inaccuracy Led to a Twitter Firestorm

Twitter instantly criticized the NCAA and the commercial. Everyone from college athlete rights advocates to pro athletes criticized the NCAA for the commercial. Some made videos of what is a more accurate representation of the daily life of a college athlete.

Current college athletes criticized the commercial, saying that it simply is not true. The commercial is completely unrealistic and only serves one purpose. That purpose is to further promote the sham of amateurism.

The NCAA was Rightfully Criticized for Their Tweet Ignoring the Women’s March Madness Tournament

The NCAA again faced well-deserved criticism when they made a tweet completely disregarding the women’s basketball tournament. Even WNBA star Breanna Stewart commented on the NCAA’s total disregard for the women’s tournament.

The tweet stated that they were no more March Madness games happening until Thursday. However, this was not true. The women’s basketball tournament was in full swing during the gap days of the men’s tournament. The NCAA again was instantly faced with another Twitter firestorm.

With that tweet, the NCAA showed how they really view the women’s tournament. The NCAA could have taken the days that the men were not playing as an opportunity to promote the women’s tournament. Instead, they completely disregarded the women’s tournament and further promoted the men’s tournament. This marketing misstep leads one to question just how much does the NCAA really value Title IX and creating equitable opportunities for women’s sports? Or is Title IX just another tool in the NCAA’s belt to justify not sharing more of the college athletics revenue with the athletes?

College T-shirts at Fanatics.com

The WiFi Tweet From 2016

The NCAA was forced to address a tweet from 2016 where they stated that they provide free Wifi to particpants in the March Madness tournament.

When the tweet resurfaced, it appeared that the NCAA was boasting about providing athletes with a resource that should automatically be given. However, the NCAA clarified that they made the tweet in 2016 to address accounts that college athletes did not have the WiFi access needed to complete their assignments. The NCAA’s tweet was in response to a tweet from a college basketball player in 2016 who tweeted about not having internet access to do his school work.

However, the real issue is in the fact that such a tweet was even necessary at all. It should have never been a question about whether the NCAA made sure that the participating athletes had everything they needed. After all, the NCAA prides its self on providing college athletes an opportunity to get an invaluable education. However, the NCAA and the college athletics system as a whole has been under much criticism for its inability to live up to the reality of that ideal. It is precisely for that reason, that an old tweet from 2016 can resurface in 2019 and instantly cause another Twitter firestorm for the NCAA.

The NCAA Could Avoid These Firestorms if They Shared the Wealth

The NCAA could save itself from a lot of these Twitter firestorms by sharing more revenue with college athletes. If the NCAA allowed college athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness, their image would improve drastically. However, the NCAA is unlikely to ever do that. The NCAA certainly will not do that while they are fighting to reclaim the ability to limit the amount of education-related benefits college athletes can receive. It seems that the NCAA prefers to fight PR nightmares than to give college athletes a more equitable piece of the pie.