Listening to sports radio on the way home yesterday and heard that Bret Bielema was on his way to Arkansas, which was unexpected, but the following comments from callers and radio personalities were not. The comments are the same every time college coaches takes another job, "this is what's wrong with college sports, offering coaches millions of dollars, universities make to much money", "if coaches can leave then athletes should be able to without sitting out a year".
Comment number one, "this is what's wrong with college sports, offering coaches million of dollars, universities make to much money".
I can't argue that the universities in high profile conferences are bringing in the money and college sports, mainly football and basketball, in these conferences are becoming big business. But I can argue the fact that the television and radio networks and the on-air personalities and "experts" are the last people that should complain about the money that these universities make. Why do I say this? That's look at some contracts that were signed for exclusive rights (in no order).
1. ESPN signs $2 billion with SEC
2. NBC Contract with Notre Dame is predicted to be $15 million per yer
3. ESPN current contract with ACC, each university will receive $17 million per year.
4. CBS and SEC: $825 million
5. ESPN and Big Ten: $1 billion
So, next time your hear your favorite on-air host or television host complain about the money that college sports make, call them and say instead of complaining at the university for taking the money, complain to your parent company for making the offer.
Us as fans, are always told if you don't like what your sport team is doing don't go to the games, well networks if you all band together and start offering lower contracts then the big conferences have no other choice then to accept it and that in return will lower the income of these universities and the universities will think twice about building that multi-million dollar building. Also, before I get a comment of well then the average students tuition will go up. My answer: it's going up now with the sports contract anyway.
Comment number two, "if coaches can leave then athletes should be able to without sitting out a year"
I am in the minority but I like the transfer system as is now. One reason why this rule is in place is to eliminate athletes just transferring on a whim, because he/she got into an argument with the coach. The majority of today's star athletes in college athletics have been pampered all their life on how great they are and they are made into prima donna even before college. With the "sit out one year" rule removed the transfer rate would go through the ceiling. Everyone also has to remember that the NCAA does make exceptions for major issues/scandals, case in point, the NCAA allowed football players that attended or committed to Penn St. to transfer without sitting out one year.
Why can coaches just leave for another job without any consequences? Because coaching is a PROFESSION and like any profession one wants to improve their status within that profession. A college athlete is going to college to get a profession.
I agree that the players were recruited by a coach to come to play ball for their program, and it seems unfair, but in today's age with all the media from Internet to television a player should know that their coach if any good may jump for a better coaching position.
With all that I wrote it comes down to two questions, Would you turn down more money? Would you turn down a better position within your profession?