License to print money

The SEC, leaving no stone unturned when it comes to revenue streams:

First off, good for the schools.  Nothing at all wrong with making a buck off your product.  It’s America.

That being said, it’s also another example of how quaint those of you who keep insisting nothing’s really changed in college football over the past quarter century come off sounding.  The reality is that the sport is immersed in commercial exploitation to a degree nobody contemplated years ago.  To pretend that the players are somehow uniquely immune from that is an interesting form of denial.

22 Comments

Filed under It's Just Bidness, SEC Football

22 responses to “License to print money

  1. Jay

    They are missing an opportunity to sell naming rights for the transfer portal.

    Liked by 1 person

    • JK Rowling could sponsor it and rename it the transfer portkey.

      Like

    • CPark58

      I think you may be on to something. While they are at it, think of all the opportunity in doing away with the player names all together.

      “State Farm #11 lines up the Winchester shotgun formation, takes the snap (brought to you by Delta) and hands off to Cadillac #7 for a 14 yard gain brought down by DreamLand BBQ #42 at the Yellawood 38 yardline”.

      Its whats on the front of the jersey that matters anyway.

      Like

  2. RandallPinkFloyd

    Dawg Sports@dawgsports
    9h9 hours ago
    More Dawg Sports Retweeted Bryan Fischer
    It’s good to know that while a college kid is inside wondering if this knee injury will ruin any pro career that the Duck will be getting his money’s worth.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bulldog Joe

      …reminding him it’s too late to get supplemental insurance. 😦

      Liked by 1 person

    • Will Adams

      Right? Honestly my first thought was that the millions the players generate for everyone, but themselves, isn’t enough? Now they can add another 6 figures to that money pile when they get hurt too! Yay…

      Like

  3. AJ

    Kohler Transfer Portal

    Like

  4. Skeptic Dawg

    I have been, and remain today, against paying players above and beyond what they currently receive. My reasoning is simple, college athletes as a whole receive a package that is above and beyond fair. The value of a 4 year scholarship far exceeds what the average college football, or basketball, player generates for the university. The vast majority of college athletes will never play professional sports, and will reply upon the education they received in return for playing a game. Yet somehow the masses have been hoodwinked into believing that every D1 college football, or basketball, player drives revenue via Heisman campaigns, sales of his jersey at the bookstore, and that as fans we are only buying tickets to see this generational player.

    Like

    • My reasoning is simple, college athletes as a whole receive a package that is above and beyond fair. The value of a 4 year scholarship far exceeds what the average college football, or basketball, player generates for the university.

      So, you’re saying if amateurism were abolished tomorrow, player compensation wouldn’t increase in an open market setting? If so, then why do you object?

      Liked by 2 people

    • Gaskilldawg

      “Athletes ad a whole” are the very reason schools as rd getting millions in revenue. Take Auburn. Its revenues are $142 million. The “cost” of the athletes is $15 million, assuming that the cost of the scholarship is the full tuition price (which it isn’t. )
      The only reason Auburn gets $142 million in revenue is because of the fact that Auburn puts athletes on the field or court.
      Without athletes Auburn gets zero.
      The “athletes as a whole” produce $137 million than their cost.
      Therefore, I respectfully disagree with your premise.

      Like

    • stoopnagle

      They have a right to their name and image. I see no reason some schmuck in Cobb County gets to make money off of Hot Rod’s popularity, but Hot Rod can’t earn a little extra scratch off his hard work.

      Like

    • I’m sure you would love to work in an industry that is a labor price-fixing cartel.

      Like

  5. Hobnail_Boot

    This is an outrage. How dare universities make money off of these poor vico-dens without allowing them the chance to find their own free market value.

    Like

  6. “commercial exploitation” is interesting terminology for something you say
    this “Nothing at all wrong with making a buck off your product” about.

    When I first started going to games in the 70’s the UGA bookstore was much smaller and had very limited merchandise. As they increased the size of the school, the stadium, the town of Athens (remember when there was no by-pass) the bookstore became much larger with a much wider product line. Not to mention in the early 70’s only rarely could a UGA game be found on television. Selling an ad on a medical tent is nothing more than an outgrowth of this growth in the sport. So are the facilities of today that Jeff Pyburn or Meat Cleaver Weaver could have not have even dreamed about. As well as the value of the scholarship. It is all just evolution of what most any of us would do if it were our responsibility to steward over the resources at UGA or any other institution.

    Like

    • “Selling an ad on a medical tent is nothing more than an outgrowth of this growth in the sport.” Or to put it another way, commercial exploitation.

      I have no problem with this. The schools should take advantage of the opportunities the market presents. They just shouldn’t prevent student-athletes from doing the same.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. The student athlete is free to make their life choices like everyone else. Do one’s best, play by the rules, and they can maximize the result of those choices.

    Like

  8. The players should be able to make money off of their likeness. When Prather Hudson took out Laura Rutledge on the sidelines, the tweet he posted about it went viral. That was a pretty good T-shirt opportunity for Mr. Hudson to make some bank off of a rare occurrence. I can’t see how anyone would have been harmed by it either. He gets a cut, she gets a cut, ESPN gets a cut, and UGA gets a cut. Prather probably would have made about a penny per shirt sold after the other three were done with him. That is good for at least one college book I am sure.

    Like

  9. Whiskeydawg

    The coke logo is going to look great on the Dawg’s uniform.

    Like