The dark side of football

Simple solution is banning agents from working with NFL players if they or the enablers affiliated with them get busted. I am sure it is a tangled web and connecting the dots may be difficult but one simple rule. violate ncaa rules for a university or player in and you lose the right to rep anybody in the nfl.

I know it's way too late to complain, but the real problem, at all levels, is the amount of money to be made & the effect that amount of money has on people's decisions. As in so many issues, the "answer" is for much more rigorous instruction in things like critical thinking & ethics, & then vigorous enforcement of rules, with no favorites played. But we all know what a pipe dream that is.

Bottom line: if you want to clean up almost any given "social issue" in this world, the first thing you need to do is clean up the people involved in it, because until you do, all your other efforts will amount to farts in a hurricane.

It's obvious that you did not read the 67-page report. While Reggie Bush's infractions were a major factor, they weren't the only ones. The University of Scandal and Corruption was penalized because of a lack of institutional control. That means the university looked the other way while some of these things were going on and on and on. . . This is not something new!
It's clear from the AD (Have you read some of his comments after the penalities were handed down????)U$C flaunted the NCAAs authority and almost dared them to do something about it!
Then, when they knew they that NCAA was going to hand down their verdict (and Pete Carroll, the "Sargeant Schultz of college football" - I know nothing!) left. Who did they hire to replace him? The guy who was on the staff (along with Ed Obergon) when some of the infractions were committed and a guy who got into trouble with infractions last year at Tennessee! Please!
There are many who HAVE read the report that think they got off easy!!! The only ruling that I disagree with was that they didn't allow ALL of the players - freshmen through senior - to transfer without having to sit out a year!

The NCAA should ban all contact between agents and potential clients until the conclusion of their colllegiate playing career. That would eliminate any potential repercussions against the athlete's former program. So many players today are using HGH or other forms of performance enhancing drugs. The problem is so massive and completely out of control that the NCAA and the NFL will never be able to effectively enforce their rules against its use. I am of the opinion that the players are putting only themselves at risk by using these drugs, and they are the ones who ultimately make the decision to use. The NFL should adopt a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. If a player suffers from health issues in the future as a direct result of their usage of these drugs, it's their burden to carry. There should be more emphasis on personal accountability in all walks of life. Placing the blame on "enablers" just doesn't cut it with me anymore.

Rookie wage scale with set 4 year contracts and set incentives built in for achievements. And a league mandated AND certified money manager. Then they can start looking at agents when they are already a player. No need to pay anyone the first 3 years when it is all laid out in stone. Unless they choose too. Agents save cash not giving it out to bums and dead beats. And the players actions, interviews and workouts at the combine are not all scripted.

Rookie wage scale with set 4 year contracts and set incentives built in for achievements. And a league mandated AND certified money manager. Then they can start looking at agents when they are already a player. No need to pay anyone the first 3 years when it is all laid out in stone. Unless they choose too. Agents save cash not giving it out to bums and dead beats. And the players actions, interviews and workouts at the combine are not all scripted.

I can't comment on most of the undercurrents, but there is an easy fix to the financial issue - scrap the current salary cap program and move to an elongated form of compensation such that a player's earnings are paid out in even annual installments (or perhaps a small adjustment for inflation) from the start of the contract until the year in which the player is eligible to receive his pension. In all cases where financial difficulty ensues, it's a budgeting issue. If the contract terms were spread out over the course of 20 years, players would recognise they're not as rich as they might otherwise think. Subsequent contracts would simply be layered on top of prior contracts, and the player's annual compensation would go up. This would ensure that players always had income coming in, at least until they were eligible for their pensions. This wouldn't work for late-rounders, or players' whose contracts are only a few hundred thousand dollars ($500,000 spread out over 20 years won't pay the bills). But this would work well for players with million dollar, multi-year contracts (a 5-year, $5m deal in total would provide at least 25 years of $200k income).

But I'm not going to hold my breath for this change. It won't happen, even if the teams were required to pay the contract amounts into an escrow fund that then paid the individual player (the easiest way to maintain the current salary cap structure, while giving the players a more realistic basis on which they can make financial and life decisions).

Its a racket and the athletes are the ones that are getting used. Indentured servant is the proper term.
I'm with Pat Patriot (even tho that WAS a fumble and not a dang tuck, but i digress). Pat stated that they should allow all the kids to transfer with no penalty. I agree. Why don't they do that? Could it be the money?

Financial Solution = Trust Fund Babies - set up NFL players where they're automatically enrolled into a 20% sheltered annuity that is not touchable until they hit 50 to 55 yrs of age (maybe not even until 60 or 62 if possible as it would be a monster retirement vehicle)...this may seem draconian; however, it's the harsh reality that until a man hits 50 is he able to identify what all the fame & glamour really is about, that nobody loves you after your last game, that the harsh reality is that women will abuse you for your money anywhere, and nowhere is that more evident in the Oprahland of the USA...

Concussion Concern = Air, more specifically compressed air, to protect joints as well as the "noodle"...have heard from bioengineers that all pro sports could be adequately protected with an air compressed brain bucket and joint release and catch sprins with air pads...this may or may not be true; however, until or if the game is ready & willing to research these technologies then we won't know what we don't know...

Agent/Coach Conflicts & Enablers = real certification, licensing and regulation with imposed sanctions beyond the financial - listen a "felony" in this country precludes someone from being a frigging notary in the majority of states in the USA, with a real certification entity in place any acts compromising the ethic code & conflicts can lead to fines, sanctions, suspension and then a revocation of the license - this would then give the agents a "reality check" when dealing in the dark side as it could potentially put them out in the cold...

Players Greed/HGH etc = good luck with that one, since the games have been played every athlete looks for an edge and many will cheat and/or compromise their health and longevity to "stay in the game"...will let others pipe in on that one as don't have a solution to mans quest for greatness in their youth at any cost...

I am amazed at some of the comments on how to solve this problem. Why do any of you think a third party has the right to mandate how a person must take the salary for which they are contracted for one year, especially under the guise of "protecting them from themselves". I agree that it makes financial sense to do it this way, but that decision has to be up to the player, not the employer. What about the lost time value of money? If a person blows all their money or chooses to hire, or surround themselves with the wrong people, then too damned bad. We are talking about adults, not children. Once a person turns 18 they are con, sidered an adult and no longer in need of being protected from their own stupidity.

As for most of the college infractions you listed, it is simple economics of how to clean it up. If you look at the early history of soccer in Europe and baseball in America, the games were initially cast as "gentlemanly pursuits" where payment would be dishonest and against the spirit of the game. But, the sports were still immensely popular for their time, and since people became interested, they were willing to pay players to fix the outcomes. Organized crime became hugely involved in the sports fixing business. The games were so susceptible to this behavior because players were going unpaid; that is, their incentives were as low as could possibly be to abide by the rules of the time. The leagues were forced to start paying players to make match fixing less attractive, and sure enough, it slowed down considerably. Now, I know college players aren't involved in this kind of illicit activity. But, the situations are analogous. Players have very low incentives to abide by the rules, since they get paid nothing to do so (benefits aside). Simple economics dictate that if players received higher incentives, they would not be as tempted to accept illegal compensation. Obviously, this raises a whole brand of issues, in how to fairly compensate collegiate players without jeopardizing the integrity of the game. But, history has shown leagues have found a way to do precisely this. Its time the NCAA accept the interest in the sport is too high to not be properly compensating its players. From an economic standpoint, they cannot maintain this monopolistic cartel any longer.

I never understood why football (and baseball and basketball) players just don't take $1M of that first signing bonus and put it in a S&P Index fund and leave it there. Why they fell the need to invest in shopping mails, bars and the like is beyond me.

For other who want to read how bad this issue is, SI did a very good story on what bad decisions players make investment wise. Required read for all.

They won't let me post the link, but it is in the March 23, 2009 Sports Illustrated titled "How (and Why) Athletes Go Broke"


End

erformc - I understand your position, and frankly, as a libertarian, I tend to agree with you in general. However, in this case, the players might be "adults" age-wise, but are infants when it comes to financial intelligence. That's not to say that every player is an idiot with their money. But you have to recognize that as a society, we don't spend any time within the formal education system teaching our students the basics of finance. And when many of the players come from disfuntional educational systems to begin with (prior to college), how do you expect them to make "adult" decisions when they don't have the training? At the age of 22, it's too late to teach most of them, they've already assembled their posse, already accepted all the whispering in their ear about how rich they're going to be, etc, etc. When the system exploits the players and then fails to prepare them for that exploitation, it's up to the system to make sure as little damage is done as a result. The time value of money is easy to fix, that's just a mathematical adjustment over time.

But there is one other factor at work here - and that's the family of the player. How empathetic is it to tell a player's child that you could have had a middle-class life, gotten a good education, and had a great start on life, but sorry, your dad spent / lost all of your family's wealth (because we didn't help him prepare for it), so you'll have to start the cycle all over again? I think when the impact extends to other people that depend on the player for basic necessities, it's in the league's interest to help their employees maintain a sound financial basis. This is a huge black-eye on the league, in my opinion (both the player's union and the owners). Many players are not employable after they retire from the league, so I don't think it's much of a stretch to view their earnings as "lifetime earnings", even though they only played for 4 years.

Bottom line, we control our kids when they don't have the tools and skills to make the right decisions. This is no different. Maybe the answer isn't to mandate it, but I don't see how a player who wanted to structure a contract this way could do that. They of course could buy an annuity that could replicate the outcome, and pay 3% or more annually for the privelege of doing so. But if the league could adopt some flexibility in this regard, it would go a long way toward addressing the financial insolvency issue. (and by the way, rich people do this all the time - they use trusts to dictate how and when their wealth is distributed to their children, in order to protect them. if it's good enough for the financial elite in this country, it's good enough for the elite athlete).

Jack - a question for you: What do you think of the union's new push for financial education? And do you think the union or league should be doing more to help educate and/or protect the players? If so, what should they do?

Where is the NCAA complicity in this scenario? Not once has the NCAA indicated their willingness to forfeit the hundreds of millions of dollars they have reaped because of Reggie Bush, USC and other top collegiate programs. Are they not a part of the process? The NCAA continual reference amateurism is a joke. The hypocrisy found in the NCAA's rhetoric is criminal. Perhaps it is time to replace the NCAA with an organization not laden with fat bureaucrats and one that truly represents the student-athlete and institutions.

Unfortunately, this is deeper than merely college athletics. A recent study from Georgetown U reports that in 1972, only 7% of careers in America required a college degree. That now stands at 24%. What is fueling this leap? The cheapening of a college degree, obviously. A master's degree now is what a college degree was 35 years ago.
I feel that college athletics are at the root of this. Colleges, in order to save face, in order to appear legitimate, in order to maintain the cash flow, had to adapt to hundreds, and thousands, of people on campus who in no other way would be there, except they could put a rubber ball through an iron hoop. When the NCAA began tracking grad rates, and TItle IX as well, were merely smoke screens.
Let's face it: the NCAA, while awesome entertainment, is a farce. Thats why the majority of quality colleges can't win today, except in free for all, one and done tournament like March Madness.
Solution: Pay the athletes, or spin off the NCAA into a separate entity. All of us, especially ex-athletes, need to quit pretending. Its not reality. We would go haywire if universities made hollywood movies that generated billions of dollars and gave the actors just an education. The fame and attraction that a super-star brings to a school is worth a lot more than the cost of an education.

Jack, once again, another insightful piece about a side of the business we too rarely see. Some have suggested a league mandated financial advisor to prevent these kinds of problems, but I think you'd be an excellent choice for the job. Without telling us the actual names, my guess is that most of your clients are doing reasonably well after football vs. the ones with the ruthless agents who are only looking for the money. It sounds like you care about the people quite a bit.

I'm a bit tired of all the poo-pooing of Reggie Bush. Here's a question: why shouldn't college players accept money? College football players risk debilitating injury in return for living expenses, 4 or 5 years of an education, the opportunity to play football, and the possibility of going to the NFL someday. For superstar players who are only there to eventually get to the NFL, what reason would they have to not accept money while on campus? The real risk of getting caught is relatively small and the rewards are obvious. Especially when what they do generates tremendous revenues for the university. How about when they have to look at their coach making millions of dollars a year (and having full mobility within the NCAA structure, by the way) while they are banned from accepting money?

Sure, we can sit here and say that they're evil and selfish and all of that. But in these scenarios I think most people would find themselves accepting money.

Until we start to treat college athletics more sensibly this sort of stuff won't go away. We need to acknowledge the fact that being a college football player is a pretty tough job. And it is just that: a job. College football is a business these days (The re-alignment of the conferences should tell us as much.) These guys are paid peanuts and cheese to do a job that most people couldn't do. Free market economics would dictate that they would be paid very handsomely for this skill set (as the NFL clearly shows.) Any economist of sufficient worth would tell you that there is only an incentive to cheat in this instance. The NCAA has tried to do away with all sorts of pseudo-economic behavior among athletes (like making them take a year off after transferring to prevent people from 'stealing athletes' which only proves how valuable a commodity they are) by some sort of strange bureaucratic fiat. For some reason, it hasn't worked.

For the agents, work with the NFLPA to have a real certification program put into place that includes a code of ethics and strict discipline for noncompliance and annual letters certified by the agents that they are abiding by the code of ethics.

Financial: strong recommendations by the certified agents, financial advisers, former players and coaches that recommends participating in a deferred compensation program that spreads their payments out over 20 years or XX amount of years or participation in a strict budget developed by certified financial planners. I think many players might be more willing to do this, as sometimes it can be hard to say "No" to their possie and enablers that includes family and friends, whereas if the money isn't available it isn't available.

A health care program that is the best in the business and takes care of players for their entire life, jointly funded by owners and players. Players with 5 accrued seasons qualify and players with less than 5 accrued seasons that have a certification by a MD that their injury is related to their football qualify to have the injuries/illnesses treated. Kind of like the SS system, current players pay for their predecessors and future players will pay for their coverage.

Aaron, my problem with your argument is that the only difference between football players in college and other college students is the scale. I tend to think of collegiate football players as interns. I don't know if you've ever worked an internship, but many college students have. Interns work their butts off for little if any money. The do it to gain experience for their resumes, to get a better idea of what jobs in that industry are really like, and to make contacts within their chosen profession. They work those internships because they know that it will dramatically improve both their odds of finding a job in their field when the graduate and their likely starting salary. Collegiate athletes are no different. They get their tuition, room, and board paid for; they expend their knowledge base of the sport, they gain additional experience and improve their game by playing against a higher level of competition, they make contacts with various players and coaches, and they get the opportunity to showcase their talents on a national level. Of course they work their butts off, but in return their odds of playing on the professional level are exponentially increased, and if they play well enough they can boost their draft status and dramatically increase their starting salary in the NFL. Blaming collegiate athletics for the actions of individuals like Bush is like blaming a company if their intern turns out to be stealing from them or selling their secrets to their competitors. They know the deal going in, and they agree to it. If the student athletes don't like it, they can spend a couple of years in the real world trying to improve their skills while they earn of living and then attempt to get a roster spot on an NFL team as a free agent. Oh, and I wouldn't point to the MLB's system as a blueprint for other sports to follow. In baseball, they try to lure kids fresh out of high school to skip college and go straight into their farm system, knowing full well that the majority of players never make it to the big show. So, these players are stuck trying to eek out a living in the minor leagues, without even a college education to fall back on. Most collegiate football players don't make it in the NFL, but at least the ones that followed through and got their degrees have something to fall back on, and aren't stuck with nothing but a desperate attempt to get a spot in Arena football or something similar.

I think the HGH problem is indicative of a larger problem. SI did a survey and showed 25% of highschoolers had used a PED, that includes adderall and other psycho stimulants. These cannot be considered ok if HGH is not. It's a society problem not a football problem.

Excellent article. A>+. The Dark Side of Football is never mentioned on Sunday, is it?

PLEASE DON"T ADD YOUR COMMENT>>>>>>>>some comments are longer than the article.

Get your own newspaper to write in................

The NFL is big business. The players' labor generates a lot of money and the players are compensated accordingly. College football is big business also, but thanks to the businesses (universities) colluding (the NCAA), the players are not compensated accordingly.

You can defend it in a lot of ways: the ideal of amateurism (which is nothing more than the aristocratic ideal of not needed to work for money), the ideal of equal competition (yet they don't care about equal coach salaries or facilities, so that "motivation" should be regarded as suspect), or whatever nonsense we're supposed to be spouting now.

The system in place is nothing more than the exploitation of laborers. Because the exploited are athletes, almost no one minds (few people will side with athletes on issues of fair compensation). In a just world, nothing Reggie Bush did (except backing out of a representation agreement) would be regarded as wrong.

The NFL is big business. The players' labor generates a lot of money and the players are compensated accordingly. College football is big business also, but thanks to the businesses (universities) colluding (the NCAA), the players are not compensated accordingly.

You can defend it in a lot of ways: the ideal of amateurism (which is nothing more than the aristocratic ideal of not needed to work for money), the ideal of equal competition (yet they don't care about equal coach salaries or facilities, so that "motivation" should be regarded as suspect), or whatever nonsense we're supposed to be spouting now.

The system in place is nothing more than the exploitation of laborers. Because the exploited are athletes, almost no one minds (few people will side with athletes on issues of fair compensation). In a just world, nothing Reggie Bush did (except backing out of a representation agreement) would be regarded as wrong.

Thank you for this refreshing honesty, Jack. Best, DK.

Nobody can solve most of the problems described, because money is always a motivator against ethics. The obligation should be for the NCAA to bring cash to the table and pony up player allotments. Of course, they would still be relatively underpaid, and ready to live beyond those means in terms of lifestyle, so the problem would still be there. It would have somewhat of a limit to those parameters and make a better case of removing the influence of negative enablers.

Gambling would probably take on greater emphasis with young guys having money in hand. To say it has no influence at this time would also be ridiculous. The fact is that some players would stay within those means set by a salaried system.

good post!!Thanks for your suggestion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!