One of the O’Bannon defendants thinks you need to start wondering what all the fuss is about.
One of the most popular proposals for paying college athletes involves giving players a share of the revenue from jersey sales. After all, the athletic department must be making millions off all those jerseys you see people wearing on game day, right? And the only explanation for a fan wearing a No. 2 Texas A&M jersey is because they want to wear Johnny Manziel‘s number, right?
What if I told you Texas A&M made just $59,690 on jersey sales for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2013?
That’s correct. The Texas A&M athletic department received just $59,690 for jersey sales last year, Heisman Trophy winner and all. That number isn’t just football, either. It includes basketball, baseball, cycling and all other jersey sales. Collegiate Licensing Company handles the licensing for Texas A&M and does not break jersey revenue down by sport or by number in its schools reports. That means we don’t know how much revenue was generated from football jerseys or the No. 2 worn by Heisman Trophy winner Manziel.
The bottom line is that athletic departments aren’t getting rich off jersey sales…
If you skip past the obvious, what took ’em so long, question, there’s another question that quickly follows: who says the schools are any good at this marketing stuff in the first place? After all, they’re the same bunch that took decades to figure out that instead of paying athletic equipment suppliers, you could get them to pay you for promoting their products.
Maybe what CLC’s really concerned about is that if Manziel could negotiate on his own, he’d wind up with more than 10% of the profits. For some, amateurism is damned good for business.