Cash, check, or charge?

Sporting News, The, July 1, 1996 by Douglas S. Looney

Inside the blizzard of NCAA rules is one that prohibits a player from signing with an agent--normally to represent the player in negotiating a professional contract--until college eligibility is complete. Texas basketball coach Tom Penders thinks this change would go a long way toward cleaning up out-of-control skullduggery in this area. It would. That's because as things stand, agents routinely--and illegally--give money to players while they are in college; if the practice is discovered, the agent says it was a loan.

So, since agents are prime conduits for getting illegal dollars to the athletes and nothing can be done about it, it obviously is time to admit defeat and try another way. That way is to let agents become part of the solution--which is by helping fund things properly by giving untainted money to the athlete--instead of part of the problem.

Basically, the issue is fairness. Any other American can hire an agent. College athletes are the only group so prohibited. Says Walter Byers, "The wheel of fortune is badly unbalanced in favor of the overseers and against the players."

8 Add substantially more money to the familiar full-ride scholarship.

The NCAA's Steve Morgan says there is "a lot more open attitude" about this idea than there used to be. This could be where the long-discussed idea of a monthly stipend--perhaps $100 a month, maybe $200--would come in.

For his part, DeVenzio insists that there "is no justification for suppressing economic opportunity. That's like giving the slaves Sunday off. They are still slaves." University of Nevada President Crowley says a sticky point with stipends is giving such a payment to haves as well as have-nots. But he says, something might work in this area depending "on how you label it."

And there are inequities depending on geography. Says Chris Polnsky at Texas, "In Queens, $200 will buy a couple theater tickets once a month; $200 in College Station (Texas) is a lot of trips to Dixie Chicken."

But, despite the obvious shortcomings of this idea, its strength is that it would be a step-albeit a tiny, baby step-in the direction of getting clean money into the hands of the athletes. Every worthy journey starts with a single you-know-what.

9 Put any money the player earns or receives while in college into a trust fund handled by the university and give it to him or her upon graduation. If the athlete doesn't graduate, the money stays with the university for academic purposes.

This is another proposal that makes proponents of the status quo grind their teeth. It also makes enormous sense.

Universities have made a point of saying student/athlete, not athlete/student. Fine. This makes the education a clear priority while at the same time not preventing the athlete from making money however he or she sees fit. This idea is not foolproof, in that it is always difficult to uncover details of the frequent golden handshakes players receive--those handshakes that end up with $20 or $50 or $100 or more in the player's palm. Yet, for major arrangements--endorsements, speeches, appearances, camps--it would be easy to keep track of DeVenzio thinks this would be a "terrific educational incentive" and would also speak to fairness because it would help ensure that the athletes "get the education that the university offered in return for their athletic talents."