Steve Patterson feels trapped in a world he never made.

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.



Filed under It's Just Bidness

31 responses to “Steve Patterson feels trapped in a world he never made.

  1. Krautdawg

    Shorter Steven Patterson: “We bought these kids, goddammit, and they should learn to behave like good capital assets.”

    Also, when he says that no corporations are lining up to pay players after high school — Steve, just get rid of that 3-years-at-college requirement for a year and see what happens. You’re in Texas. Jerry Jones is standing by.


  2. So, to use Patterson’s logic, if I was a skilled university intern developing a unique agricultural product that makes millions for the University, the checkout guy at the Bookstore can sue me for equal pay?


  3. Dog in Fla

    “We are not giving them nothing.”

    “Patterson grew paranoid.” When he drew the double negative talking point but used it anyway


  4. Joe Schmoe

    I love how the schools continue to use the “we will get sued by other athletes” / “fair pay” argument against paying players. While I realize that these things would be inconvenient for the schools, what bearing does this have on whether or not they should have to pay football / basketball players based on the value they are creating? Totally unrelated IMO.


    • Besides that, it’s a non sequitur to the previous question. If players are being paid for their NILs by third parties, the schools aren’t laying out a dollar for that. And if they are being paid by the schools for those, there’s nothing stopping the schools for offering similar deals to all student-athletes. It’s just that somebody on the equestrian team isn’t likely to generate the same kind of market value as Johnny Football.


    • 3rdandGrantham

      The so-called logic being espoused by these well positioned and highly compensated leaders (sic) is utterly astounding. If there’s any good to come of it, I must admit it certainly makes me feel a bit smarter.

      Mind you, there are some absolutely brilliant and talented people out there, but there are also some in various high capacities that simply leave you scratching your head as to how they possibly ascended to the position that they’re in. Just last week I had lunch with a VP of a well respected corporation, and I came away from the meeting totally unimpressed with them (and wondered whether nepotism or aberrant photographs of C level execs aided in their positioning).


  5. Cojones

    Patterson is only bringing up the unsolved problems that have been created. Don’t demonize every writer/person as to how they think and want to see problems resolved. You have no clue as to his visceral feelings for the athletes. He may want each player to have a better life in CFB as well as anyone; he just doesn’t see that this is the way without creating havoc..


  6. Dog in Fla

    No way is Steve Patterson like Donald Sterling! Steve hasn’t even been adjudicated yet

    Besides that, according to Madoffs Mets (Today 11:38am):

    “To be fair, even the NFL won’t allow Vince Young to profit from his own likeness.”


  7. Will Trane

    Why not form minor league teams. Those teams have a conference and region. The teams have owners, corporate or individual owners and investors. Then other investors can create stadiums and bring on other assets, coaches, equipment, and etc. Then they can pay the athlete according to their worth or skills coming out of high school. No academic qualifcations to deal with. No limits on coach’s salary. Just do away with collegiate programs all together. There would be no need.
    In the long run, the athlete is better off. Market his own name and gear.
    In other words take football out of the college ranks all together. No UGA Dawgs or Bama Crimson Tide.
    To be honest the way collegiate players, programs, and etc have gone in the past 10 years it would not bother me one bit for it to leave the collegiate ranks altogether.
    Patterson see collegiate sports in the traditional and purist sense.
    Yeah, I think it is time for minor league football formation and teams.


  8. Will Trane

    Start paying them. Never saw an employee who felt they should not be getting more pay for less time and effort. Or an investor who is not getting enought return on their capital investment from either growth, dividends, interest, or a comp package.
    I think this is the unwinding of collegiate sports.
    Say good-bye to Game Day.
    For an ahtlete with skills would it not be better to deal with “Punt, Pass, and Kick” rather than an ACT, SAT, and GPA. I can play coach, but I’m not sure about the academics. I’ll try that later after I make some jack.


  9. Will Trane

    Would it not be better for some investors in each state within the SEC to come together, form a team, start hiring players right out of high school, enter into a comp package with each, hire a staff [say in are in Alabama…hire Saban and staff from UofA], build a practice site and development site, then lease a stadium [say Sanford from UGA]
    Would not UGA be better off. No salay and retirement packages to fund, less faculaty, less administrators, no funding the cost of scholarship and etc. That would be good. They investors take all the risks of ownership…profit, bankruptcy, failure to fund a salary or comp package.
    Or would it be better to let those universities to continue to thrive as they have for the past decades, athletes developing academically and skill wise at no cost, a path to the NFL in 36 months, no investment by the student/athete other than time and effort.
    Prefer the minor league set up rather than collegiate. All about money for the player and the investor. Alums and universities do not matter. You paid for your tuition, got your degree, and an opportunity to do something with it. All evens out.


  10. JCDAWG83

    If the pay for play thing works out, how does the 3 years out of high school or 21 yrs old before draft eligible withstand any sort of court challenge? Once the players are being paid, aren’t they professional football players? The draft rule will be blatant age discrimination at that point. An 18 year old can legally perform any job he/she is qualified for except be a professional football player in the NFL because they are not 21 years old. How will that “rule” stand up in court? In my opinion, the current system is unlawful, how will it be defensible if the college players are getting paid to play?

    The NFL has enjoyed a free farm system forever. It’s time for the NFL to fund their own developmental league like MLB and the NBA do. Why should a Clowney or Lattimore or Gurley be forced to play for three years for chump change? The college programs should not be forced by an unlawful NFL rule to spend the money to develop players for the NFL. If players are going to be paid to play football, they should be able to be professional football players, period.


  11. Ant123

    I think what he said is exactly right. There are going to be a lot of people that are wanting what he is speaking against that are going to realize there is a hook in the bait.


  12. Biggus Rickus

    Maybe the man’s an asshole, and I think he’s wrong about players being able to trade on their fame. He’s not wrong that the University is largely creating the value, though. Manziel’s or Young’s value would have been much less if they’d played for, say, San Diego State. Players drive merchandise and ticket sales and donations at the margins. The bulk of revenue generated by the money-making programs would exist regardless of the quality of the product on the field.


    • Hackerdog

      I agree. But Payton Manning works in a sport where the value is largely created by the NFL. He surely couldn’t sell as many tickets to watch him throw a ball as a private exhibition of his skills as he could to watch him lead the Denver Broncos against another NFL team. But he still gets paid handsomely and is free to market his NIL.


      • Biggus Rickus

        I think professional sports revenues are more reliant on the quality of the players, but your point is still valid. I certainly think players should be able to market themselves however they like and sell whatever personal possessions people are willing to buy. Compensation from the University is another matter that opens up a much larger can of worms.