You can argue that the NCAA rule prohibiting college players from selling "their" stuff is stupid, but don't tell me that high profile players like Ohio State quarterback Terelle Pryor weren't aware that doing so was wrong.
In case you haven't heard, five Buckeyes - including Pryor - have been suspended for the first five games of next season for selling various colllege football-related merchandise, primarily their 2008 Big Ten championship rings.
In yet another NCAA-rule head-scratcher, the Ohio State five will be allowed to play in the Sugar Bowl against Arkansas. That's right: they're not eligible for the start of next season, but they are eligible to finish this one.
The NCAA doesn't approve of players selling off goods that they've been "given" for being college football players, although you could make a pretty good case that these guys haven't been "given'' anything, but rather earned it - championship rings, game jerseys, even the fabled gold pants that an Ohio State player is awarded for beating Michigan four consecutive years.
While the NCAA doesn't allow players to earn money for playing sports (because that might cut into the millions the school and coaches make), there is nothing wrong with players being given officially-approved merchandise like championship rings and jerseys.
In fact, merchandise from appearing in bowl games can range into several hundred dollars worth of stuff, including spending money in the form of pre-paid VISA gift cards. No other athlete on campus gets this kind of swag, yet somehow the NCAA continues to insist that college football players are to be treated "just like regular students.''
But just like your grandmother would be offended to know that you're regifting that ridiculous set of coffee mugs she gave you last Christmas, the NCAA is offended when players actually act like they own championship rings, jerseys, and other participation-related goods the NCAA allows them to have.
Now, you can argue that Terelle Pryor's 2008 Big Ten Championship Ring is not really his if he isn't free to sell it, and you'd get no argument from me. You can argue that Pryor and the rest of them should be allowed to sell off anything that is theirs, and I'd absolutely agree.
But don't tell me Pryor didn't know it was wrong for him to sell his stuff.
First of all, remember the start of this season when Georgia receiver A.J. Green was suspended for selling his jersey? You don't think a high -profile player like Pryor isn't aware when another equally high-profile player is suspended?
These guys keep up with each other. They were all part of the same recruiting class; travel in the same off-season circles; follow each other to see who is thinking about turning pro early.
I've heard the argument that Green's case is different because he sold his jersey to an agent, but do you realy think Pryor and his teamates thought it through to split those hairs?
But here is the real reason I don't believe Pryor didn't at least suspect is was wrong for him to sell his NCAA-related merchandise for a profit: he would have known that other players at Ohio State hadn't done it.
Trust me, after 30 years of covering college football, I know that players follow the lead of older players. If older players have found a way to stick a few extra bucks in their pocket, younger players see that and learn how to follow suit.
And I don't think for a minute there hadn't been conversations in dorm rooms late at night about the possibility of selling memorabilia. Every player is actutely aware of how rabid fans are, and what fans would be willing to pay for pictures, jerseys, sweat bands, rings, playbooks - anything.
Which is exactly why the NCAA has this rule that players can't sell sport-related merchandise. Because as soon as it becomes legal, it opens the door for "fans'' to start paying ridiculous sums of money to those players as a way to suppliment the players' bank accounts and make attending "their'' school more attractive (meaning, profitable).
Do you know why players don't get actual tickets to their games anymore, but have to put names of family on a pass list? Because once upon a time when players did get actual tickets, they sold them for extraordinary amounts of money to boosters who understood the recruiting advantage of knowing a players' NCAA-approved allotment of tickets could be a legal source of cash.
So while I agree completely that players should be allowed to sell anything they want that is theirs, I absolutely don't believe players like these from Ohio State were not aware that doing so was wrong.
Of course, all this realy does is force a player like Pryor into coming out and declaring for the NFL early.
Ultimately, that's how he was going to take care of his family, and not with a lousy $2,500 gained from selling off a ring, a jersey, and a pair of game pants.
Here's my question, though: if this had happened in the SEC or Big 12, do you think the ruling would have been the same?
No comments:
Post a Comment