Ban College Football?
In the Wall Street Journal today, Buzz Bissinger, author of "Friday Night Lights," calls for a ban--an outright ban--on college football:
In more than 20 years I've spent studying the issue, I have yet to hear a convincing argument that college football has anything do with what is presumably the primary purpose of higher education: academics.
That's because college football has no academic purpose. Which is why it needs to be banned. A radical solution, yes. But necessary in today's times....
Who truly benefits from college football? Alumni who absurdly judge the quality of their alma mater based on the quality of the football team. Coaches such as Nick Saban of the University of Alabama and Bob Stoops of Oklahoma University who make obscene millions. The players themselves don't benefit, exploited by a system in which they don't receive a dime of compensation. The average student doesn't benefit, particularly when football programs remain sacrosanct while tuition costs show no signs of abating as many governors are slashing budgets to the bone....
I actually like football a great deal. I am not some anti-sports prude. It has a place in our society, but not on college campuses.
I'm still collecting my thoughts on this, but to be honest? Half the reason I decided to post it was to see how Dave Carter would reply. Dave's never less than entertaining, of course. But when he's good and mad? Dave's a thing of pure beauty.
- Comment (111)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (7)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Ban College Football?
I'm thinking we ban the Wall Street Journal before we ban college football.
Mar '11
Re: Ban College Football?
How many other activities have "no academic purpose" on campus? Should they also going to be on the chopping block?
Edited on May 8, 2012 at 1:13amMar '11
Re: Ban College Football?
Rather than banned, it should be replaced by real football, aka soccer, where men are men (no helmets and padding) and women are much more fun to watch.
Aug '10
Re: Ban College Football?
The only problem with College Football is that the sport raises immense sums of money and the players -- who place themselves at significant physical risk -- see very little of the revenues from the risks they assume.
The big money contracts that the NCAA has with various networks demonstrate the inequity of the system. It's a sport that generates pro level revenues for the "owners" and "overseers" but which provides relatively pitiful sums to the players.
Dec '10
Re: Ban College Football?
I'm pretty sure that part where it says "the right to keep and bear arms" is talking about quarterbacks.
May '10
Re: Ban College Football?
I've heard this suggestion for years, going back to the '90s when Sports Illustrated flat-out told the University of Miami it should shut down its football program. I've always thought the idea was sensible. Like lots of sensible ideas, though, (e.g., Jeb Bush for President) I hope it never, ever, never, never happens.
Re: Ban College Football?
At a Rhodes Scholarship interview, I once asked a senior from Oklahoma State University what an OSU degree was worth. When he responded with an honorable defense of his alma mater, I drew his attention to a recent graduate -- then employed by the Washington Redskins -- who was being touted as a model for American youth because he had announced that he was learning how to read.
Football at Dartmouth may not be a problem. At the big state schools, it is. When I pressed the OSU senior, asking him what should be done about the problem, he suggested that the players be paid what their efforts are worth. To that I would not object.
Jun '10
Re: Ban College Football?
Buzz Bissinger has lost it. I read the article, picked my teeth up off the floor, and wondered how one man could be so wrong. At the schools where football and basketball make money (every single school in the SEC, even Vandy), they pay for all the other sports. Auburn has a fantastic equestrian team (gotta be a big money draw there), an incredible swimming & diving team, and a basketball team (that hasn't been to the Big Dance since Charlie Barkley was on the team. Football supports softball, gymnastics, golf, and all other female sports.
Keep football. Basketball? Well, maybe during March Madness.
We also build rockets for space travel, construct building in the architecture school, supply many of the nurses for Alabama, and heal animals from all over the world. When AUDad & I were in school there, a kangaroo was flown in because of Auburn's work with ruminants.
Edited on May 8, 2012 at 1:33amJul '10
Re: Ban College Football?
The idea of paying players has always been a non-starter for me because it usually ignores the fact these players are already getting an education paid for by their scholarship as well as housing and food provided by the school. Having had to work nights to pay for my college expenses, I always found it offensive to hear athletes cry about how rough they had it when everything I was having to work for was being handed to them. Is there really a reason to have scholarship sports and not just make them all like Division III or intramural? What "scholarship" is actually being performed by college sports? It looks more like a cash cow for the colleges.
May '10
Re: Ban College Football?
There's a reason those football coaches make "obscene" millions: they bring in even more obscene millions to the university.
And the athletes aren't "exploited", since they freely choose to participate in the arrangement. And why wouldn't they? They get tuition, room and board, fame, and sometimes even a shot at the NFL. Not a bad gig.
But most of all, college football is fun. Money-making fun. A complete and total win-win of fun. Which is probably why this sourpuss hates it so much.
Feb '12
Re: Ban College Football?
It's an interesting idea, but having graduated from a major university that doesn't have a football program. It was the one thing I really missed from my time there. College is about learning, but there a lot of other things that are part of the learning "experience." Perhaps putting a greater emphasis on the academic aspect, i.e., placing higher standards on athletes academic performance, would be a better solution.
Mar '12
Re: Ban College Football?
I guess full-ride scholarships and a quality (debatable) education don't count as compensation anymore. Not to mention world-class coaching from said overpaid millionaires. I agree that the players are exploited by the universities who rake in the cash on television deals, but claiming they "don't receive a dime in compensation" goes too far.
Oh, and why does Buzz Bissinger suddenly hate America?
Aug '10
Re: Ban College Football?
So...income redistribution is your argument in favor of College Football?
My problem with the current college football regime is that the players aren't seeing the fruits of their labors. They risk serious injury and a full ride plus dorm room -- no cream cheese on that bagel or your violating -- doesn't amount to a comparative salary to the risks they take. Even at a school like USC the total "cost to attend" is around $63,000. Maybe that's a fair wage for the player at USC, but a player at UCLA doesn't receive the same "financial" compensation.
Heck...Auburn students (War Eagle!) are getting ripped off at only $49k per year.
If college football is to be a major revenue generator that is effectively the minor league for professional football, the players deserve financial compensation commensurate with the risks they take and the revenue they generate.
Oct '10
Re: Ban College Football?
I'm an Oklahoma graduate with 2 sons at the university. I love college football on several levels but the system today is surreal. I'll call on the muse of Thomas Sowell -- commercialize college football. Eliminate the sham of amateurism and the scandal of the NCAA. Playing for money would allow players and their families to make rational choices. Money would flow as it does in other professional sports. Given commercial success universities would be hard pressed to wean themselves from branding teams. But at least the forces might be more visible than they are today. College football is many things. It ain't pretty.
Jul '10
Re: Ban College Football?
Word for word, Reusser, word for word.
And it ain't all the "quality of the education" as it is the morality of the educators. That is: passing players who shouldn't pass and dropping players who should be dropped.
Aug '10
Re: Ban College Football?
I am Bo Jackson ! No I am Spartacus !!
Earlier post about death of traditional Universities probably incited this.
Kirk Douglas ,Oliver Reed , and 30 Odd Foot of Grunts subpoenaed.
Jan '11
Re: Ban College Football?
Pause a second.
Brian Watt had an interesting thread yesterday on the future of higher education. Earlier today, etoiledunord also had an interesting thread about how Georgetown no longer reflects Catholic values.
A lot of people (not just on Ricochet) have higher education on their minds. For instance, this thread talks about banning college football because it "serves no academic purpose."
We can't enjoy college football because it might obstruct liberal academics from preparing us for the new economic order?
That's not a bug. That's a feature.
- - - - - -
But pause a moment ... why are we suddenly having conversations about higher education?
Synchronicity?
May '11
Re: Ban College Football?
If I read Bissinger's article correctly, he was arguing that college football doesn't make economic sense for more than a handful of schools and is a detriment to the broad purposes of higher education. I love every sort of sport that shows up on the tube and actually spend time and money to attend sports at colleges and professional venues, but I agree with his assessment. Rick Telander, a former high profile Sports Illustrated writer, wrote a terrific book in 1996 called The Hundred Yard Lie which detailed the corruption of college athletics specifically related to the exploitation of the athlete, and Murray Spurber expanded this in a simialr book entitled Beer and Circuses in 2000. Both authors have proposed systems of converting college athletics to a minor league professional system that would be far more honest and vastly less corrupting to the schools involved and society as a whole. As for college football, it may all be a moot point, if you believe in the power of trial lawyers and Tyler Cowen's analysis described in What Would the End of Football Look Like?
Jan '11
Re: Ban College Football?
Nice arguments, folks - rational, logical and well-expressed. All of them terribly misguided as an answer to a Democrat.
(How does Freesmith know Bissinger is a Democrat? Bissinger used the adjective "obscene" as a modifier to "millions.")
Allow me to show you how to do this.
What a racist piece of privileged white-boy garbage! Bissinger probably wants to save scholarships and increase liberal arts department funding for the benefit of his own geeky kids. He wants to bar the road to an education and possible high earnings to the blacks who make up the vast majority of big-time college football programs, probably so "Ashley" Bissinger can play softball and "Jake" Bissinger can letter in archery or something.
Bissinger is a Philly racist millionaire lackey of the white power structure seeking to put down a college sport played by blacks and to preserve the gated community of his beloved groves of academe.
Your welcome.
Edited on May 8, 2012 at 2:04amDec '11
Re: Ban College Football?
Part of the job description of a public university is to provide trade skills; the NCAA certainly meets those standards. Unlike their counterparts in basketball and baseball, football players are not physically capable of playing in the NFL immediately out of high school. Universities provide these players with an education (if the player so chooses to take advantage), room and board, and most importantly, a stage for amateurs to grow and develop into professionals. College players should stop whining about payment and express gratitude for the opportunity to strut their stuff in front of the scouts.
The joy and excitement of alumni (see Dave Carter) are an added bonus. At the very least, those agitated alums help young players learn how to play in front of big, noisy crowds and deal with the press.