Silly season

I having a hard time deciding which of these two columns are dumber – help me out here.

  • In this corner, you’ve got John Feinstein, who’s decided that because John Junker is the “… new poster boy for college athletics, a man who absolutely defines what college athletics is truly all about…”, the bowl system needs to be blown up in its entirety and replaced with a playoff.  A playoff which would still be controlled by the same corrupt/incompetent bastards who allowed Junker to flourish in the first place.
  • And in this corner, you’ve got a proposal which time has certainly come:  a players association for college athletes.  Thinking of 17- and 18-year old kids organizing is amusing in and of itself – when I was 18, I could hardly get six friends to agree on where to go for dinner – but the idea that the players association would have any clout outside of its superstars is what really sells the deal.  And as the article notes, those are the least likely to join.


Filed under BCS/Playoffs, College Football, It's Just Bidness, Media Punditry/Foibles

7 responses to “Silly season

  1. crapsandwich

    “A playoff which would still be controlled by the same corrupt/incompetent bastards who allowed Junker to flourish in the first place”.

    Pretty laughable isn’t it? Can’t even go into a players association, that would take some real mental ward thought on my part.


  2. JasonC

    The worst is having an 8-slice pizza for 3 guys. I always hated that.


  3. Dawg85

    1a and 1b for dumb. Boycott???? How about the schools lock you out when it comes time to pay for tuition, books and room and board? There would be thousands of guys standing in line waiting for a chance to put on the old college colors and go hit someone. College football does have name recognition but it is not the same as professional sports.


  4. Stoopnagle

    What’s hilarious about the pay-the-players mantra is the bottomline. There are nary a handful of “profitable” athletic departments across the country. The vast majority of D-1 programs lose money on football. All things considered, the athletes cost more than they bring in! All the alarmists calling for paying the players are making assumptions about college football that, on average, just aren’t accurate.

    And that doesn’t even begin to address what you do with athletes in non-revenue sports who are losing opportunities to compete because of middling institutions desperate attempts to be “relevant” through high-profile football programs (as high-profile as it is on Tuesday nights on ESPN2) and their over-paid coaching staffs. Even if you take away Sun Belt and MAC and the new WAC (that just added non-existent 1-AA teams!), UConn is losing money hand-over-fist after going to a BCS bowl. Hell, Michigan for all it’s tradition and success posted losses after its last BCS bowl and back then UM wasn’t playing the salary spiral game with coaches and ADs.


  5. 69Dawg

    There is a player’s association it’s the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. Maybe they can strike.