Here’s Georgia’s 2014 schedule poster.
Yeah, no way to know for sure that the big dude in the middle wearing number 3 is Todd Gur… or number 14 to his left setting up to throw the ball is Hutson Ma… well, you get the idea.
Can I say thanks to the advertisers?
It’s game week. You know you’ve got an appetite.
Slide up and load a plate.
- Fans get to vote on where the Goodyear Blimp shows up opening weekend. Georgia vs. Clemson is one option.
- Groo has some thoughts about the Star position.
- Phil Steele, the New York Times and conference predictions.
- Paul Myerberg has Auburn at #9 on his preseason preview list. (He thinks Kansas State is more likely to beat the Tigers than Georgia.)
- It sounds like Ramik Wilson’s coaches are trying to send him a message.
- John Sununu thinks it’s time to tax college athletics.
- It’s a sign of what people think of the NCAA that some thought Oklahoma’s request for a waiver for Dorial Green-Beckham to play this season might be approved. It wasn’t.
- Think there’s much of a talent gap in the ACC? One conference coach does: “According to one ACC coach, FSU is so stocked with talent across its depth chart that he believes about half the league’s teams do not have one player who would start for Florida State this year based on what he’s seen on film.”
Now, this, my friends, is chutzpah with a capital “C”.
Rihanna, Katy Perry, or Coldplay might be doing the Super Bowl halftime show this year—that is, if they’re willing to pay up. According to The Wall Street Journal, the NFL has narrowed down its list of potential performers for the 2015 gig to those three candidates, though it’s also asking “at least some of the acts” if they’d be willing to pay the league for the privilege of playing the halftime show—something that’s absolutely insane, but not 100 percent unreasonable, considering how many people actually watch the performance. Alternately (and this is where it gets wacky), they should “be willing to contribute a portion of their post-Super Bowl tour income to the league.” [Emphasis added.]
As Eric Loomis wonders, it’s not that far from there to asking for a cut of their players’ promotional deals.
It strikes me that Steve Patterson is missing the boat on this one. The NFL should inspire him. Instead of drawing a firm line in the sand against student-athlete compensation, he ought to insist on paying college players a little something now in return for a piece of their future earnings. See how much Johnny Football winds up liking them apples!
The amazing thing to me isn’t that Steve Patterson keeps saying stupid stuff like this (h/t)…
But what about athletes like Vince Young and Johnny Manziel, who create huge benefits and revenues for their universities, from fund-raising to ticket sales to sponsorships and licensing? Shouldn’t they at least be allowed to monetize their famous names? “No,” he says categorically. “I am not saying they did not benefit the university. But you have to understand that both parties benefit. The university is largely creating the value. The athletes are trading on the value the universities have created. No corporations are going to be lining up to pay them money out of high school. They also get a huge benefit on the college stage by having such assets as strength coaches, nutritionists, psychological support, tutors, mentors, media training. All of that costs money. It is too easy for those in the sports press to say, ‘You are manipulating and using these kids. You are giving them nothing.’ We are not giving them nothing.”
There are also practical problems with paying athletes, Patterson says. He suggests that if schools pay Young or Manziel, they are going to be sued by athletes on the soccer or basketball or rowing teams, looking for equal pay. “That would almost certainly happen,” he says. “And if you have a situation where the students are employees, you will have to either hugely increase revenues or cut costs and eliminate teams.”
It’s that he thinks saying it helps his cause.