The Troubling Interference of Washington in College Football
College football, a sport steeped in tradition and passion, finds itself at a crossroads. The recent emergence of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals and the ease of player transfers have shaken the foundations of the game, leading to concerns about competitive balance and the future of the sport. Amidst this upheaval, a potentially more unsettling development has emerged: the prospect of federal government intervention.
Nick Saban, the legendary retired coach, believes college football needs fixing and advocates for federal involvement. Senator Tommy Tuberville echoes these sentiments, warning that the sport is "in danger." The author questions what exactly the sport is in danger of, and challenges the justifications for federal intervention, noting that Saban and Tuberville seem to be pining for a bygone era when coaches wielded unchecked power and athletes had fewer rights.
The involvement of former President Donald Trump further complicates the situation. Apparently, Trump has considered an executive order addressing payments to college athletes. But is this really the role of the President? How would an executive order lawfully and effectively improve college football? Why should the executive branch restrict athlete movement or impose regulations on the nascent NIL marketplace that state legislation and the court system have already established?
The author points out that Trump campaigned on deregulation and smaller government. A presidential bailout for the NCAA, an organization already facing considerable public disapproval, hardly seems like good politics. The author argues that Trump should disregard Saban and Tuberville’s complaints and encourage college football leaders to address their own issues.
The author invokes the spirit of Ronald Reagan, quoting his famous line about the nine most terrifying words in the English language: "I’m from the government, and I’m here to help." For college athletes, the author suggests, a similar sentiment might arise from the words, "I’m from the federal government, and I’m here to fix college sports."
Legal expert Michael McCann believes that any executive order limiting athlete compensation would only create chaos and invite a new wave of legal challenges, rather than providing stability. College football, the author contends, doesn’t need Trump to make it great again. The sport remains popular, and any problems should be solved by college football’s own leaders, not by politicians.
Steve Berman, an attorney representing college athletes in a lawsuit against the NCAA, labels Saban a "hypocrite" and "an opponent of NIL from the start." He encourages Trump to embrace the free market and not impede athletes’ deal-making abilities.
The author suggests that alternatives to federal intervention already exist. The NIL market could be allowed to regulate itself, and the NCAA could pursue collective bargaining with athletes to regain some control over rosters and transfer rules. The author questions why college sports leaders, who seem weary of the NIL and transfer markets, should receive a federal bailout when they haven’t fully explored the possibility of collective bargaining.
The rise of the NIL market represents a significant win for athletes, allowing them to benefit from their talent and hard work. Meanwhile, salaries for coaches and administrators continue to skyrocket, and athletic departments are generating more revenue than ever before.
Saban’s apparent frustration stems from the fact that athletes now have the freedom to earn money and transfer schools, a stark contrast to the era when coaches held all the power. He retired from coaching rather than adapt to this new landscape. The author questions Saban’s concern about athletes’ "swelling paydays," pointing out the escalating salaries for coaches and coordinators.
Tommy Tuberville has lamented the lack of "loyalty" among athletes who transfer for NIL deals. The author reveals Tuberville’s hypocrisy, recounting instances where Tuberville himself abandoned coaching positions for better opportunities, despite claiming unwavering devotion to his previous schools.
Tuberville now calls for a government crackdown on the transfer portal and the federalization of NIL rules. The author highlights the contradiction between Tuberville’s call for federal intervention and the principles of limited government and states’ rights.
Saban also complains about the lack of competitive balance, suggesting that the team with the most money will have the best chance of winning. The author notes that college football has always lacked competitive balance, and that factors such as deep-pocketed boosters and under-the-table payments to players have historically influenced the sport. The author reminds the reader that Tuberville coached at Miami during a pay-for-play scandal.
The author concludes that college football should not rely on federal bureaucrats or retired coaches to solve its problems. The author believes that the potential for unintended consequences and the erosion of individual freedoms outweigh any perceived benefits of government intervention. The author argues that federal intervention in college sports is unwarranted and potentially harmful. College football’s challenges, while significant, should be addressed by the sport’s leaders, not by politicians seeking to impose their own agendas. The free market, collective bargaining, and a commitment to athlete empowerment offer more promising paths forward than government regulation.
