Many posters on the Cardboard have opined on some of the current challenges facing collegiate sports — the Portal, NIL, play-for-pay, and a host of other issues that seek to respect the individual player, but might be detrimental to the sport itself. These issues can affect the ability to coach, the stability of the team, and the economic or academic interest of the university. We fans have lots to say about these issues on our fan forum, but little to say in the boardrooms where these issues are discussed and decided.
Of course, we can make our point by voting with our feet. We can quit buying tickets or stop watching games if we don’t like what has become of the game. But given the current trend in the sport — the potential surge of attendance and the media interest in woman’s basketball — others might have already voted with their feet, but in the other direction. Yet the resultant game itself might be unsustainable if the current changes in the way the players are managed actually end up devouring the game.
I suggest that we Card-boarders direct some of our collective energy to speculate how the current challenge we face in collegiate athletes might be channeled into creative opportunities.
Certainly the current Portal Madness is at a beginning stage and adjustments are bound to be made — just as in any other dynamic of change, the pendulum will swing back. For example, the transfer portal has been liberalized to give most of the power to the players leaving few options to the universities, athletic departments, and coaches. Once signed on to a school, players are guaranteed four years of play. Yet the players can quit and go elsewhere each year without consequence, leaving gaping holes in team's four-year plans. The institution is obligated, yet the student is not.
I would suggest that some sort of contractual agreement between player and school must be created to make this a fair agreement and that whomever is empowered to authorize this, should act. (This issue undoubtably has already started.)
I wonder what other ways the system might be changed to create a more equitable agreement between the player and the school without compromising the university. I’m curious what other members of this forum might suggest in terms of school, conference, or association policy to create a more equitable system that considers what is best for all — the university, the players, the coaches, and the fans.
Comments welcomed!
Of course, we can make our point by voting with our feet. We can quit buying tickets or stop watching games if we don’t like what has become of the game. But given the current trend in the sport — the potential surge of attendance and the media interest in woman’s basketball — others might have already voted with their feet, but in the other direction. Yet the resultant game itself might be unsustainable if the current changes in the way the players are managed actually end up devouring the game.
I suggest that we Card-boarders direct some of our collective energy to speculate how the current challenge we face in collegiate athletes might be channeled into creative opportunities.
Certainly the current Portal Madness is at a beginning stage and adjustments are bound to be made — just as in any other dynamic of change, the pendulum will swing back. For example, the transfer portal has been liberalized to give most of the power to the players leaving few options to the universities, athletic departments, and coaches. Once signed on to a school, players are guaranteed four years of play. Yet the players can quit and go elsewhere each year without consequence, leaving gaping holes in team's four-year plans. The institution is obligated, yet the student is not.
I would suggest that some sort of contractual agreement between player and school must be created to make this a fair agreement and that whomever is empowered to authorize this, should act. (This issue undoubtably has already started.)
I wonder what other ways the system might be changed to create a more equitable agreement between the player and the school without compromising the university. I’m curious what other members of this forum might suggest in terms of school, conference, or association policy to create a more equitable system that considers what is best for all — the university, the players, the coaches, and the fans.
Comments welcomed!