The slow death of college football

Are we looking at the end of traditional college football as I have known it for more than fifty years? Having lamented the passing of many elements of what I really enjoyed about college football with this post, I think that my worst fears continue to be fueled. The two most recent changes in the 'playing field' of college athletics that trouble me are (1) the new right college athletes have to sell their own rights to advertisers, sponsors, etc. and (2) the 'transfer portal,' where college football players become free agents, able to transfer after playing with their original scholarship team.

I'm not saying that I am against markets or against individual rights and ownership of their 'brand,' but college football is not supposed to be a business, not a market, and not a competition to possibly put another school out of business. It is in the best interest all the colleges and the "student" athletes to have some agreements and limits to protect the viability of members of the NCAA and to maintain at least a semblance of the "student" in the "student athlete" claim. Otherwise, colleges ought to get out of the 'business' of these big revenue sports, not pretend that the athletes are primarily students, and just sponsor a professional team to represent the school -- if getting alums all excited about their school's team really matters.

And back to the athletes' marketing rights, it seems odd that the college should not be able to demand a significant share of those sponsorship revenues, as the college athletes market value is due, in part, to their affiliation with the college, with the school uniform. The college promotes the athletes as part of the team, and not just for the Heisman trophy, so it is reasonable for colleges to earn a share of the individual player's sponsorship money. The player is more important and marketable because he plays quarterback for State U, not just because he is an athlete. And the college is already compensating the player, with a scholarship that could be worth as much as $300,000 plus providing the athlete with a platform to market his image, on television and the playing field, with national broadcasts watched by millions of people. At some point you'd have to ask: Is the start quarterback playing for himself, for the team or for the college?

So here is what I wrote as my recommendations in my lamentation late last year:

• The regular season would begin after Labor Day and end with the final Saturday in November (along with no college basketball games until December). Ten games, maybe eleven. Schools could elect to play eight or nine games.

• No overtimes, period. A tie is a tie. Silly overtime rules ruin the game.

• Penn State would be an independent and the 'old' leagues would return as they were in the 1960's: ten teams in the Big Ten, 12 in the Big Twelve, eight in the Pac-8, and the original SEC and SWC teams.

• Eight bowl games, the last four on New Year's Day, and no playoffs.

• National champion decided by a one-time vote of the Division I coaches after the last bowl games, about January 2; no vote by the coaches until that time.

And I will add these points worth considering:

• If colleges pay players, include the value of their scholarship package as taxable income.

• Allow the college to claim at least ten percent of any outside earnings the athlete has while he is under scholarship to that school.

• Eliminate freshman eligibility and red-shirt options. Require stricter academic standards, including courses, majors, grade point averages and course loads.

• Any transfers -- portal or not -- should result in compensation to the original college, be it in the form of recouping the college's investment or a predetermined 'buy out' clause.

Outside of a specific sentimental attachment to Penn State football and to college football in general, I have very little interest in college football today, at any level, other than as an occasional attempt to re-live the positive memories of college football of years past.