Coach Mendenhall speaks out on Corruption of coaches

Great, great article!!! Way to go Coach. Its about time somone in the ranks called out their colleagues.



http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15334406/opinions-agree-corruption-in-college-football-tied-to-money?source=rss_teams_Brigham_Young_Cougars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good article.



I especially liked Bronco's quote, "I prefer walk-on players compared to scholarship players because they're actually contributing their own resources for the value of participating in sport and getting their education." It shows that in a market economy some people are willing to pay to play a sport (which should be obvious as many people pay to play little league).



But with all due respect to coach Mendenhall, it certainly does make sense, even in this economy, for successful coaches to be paid large amounts of money. They help produce a product that is valued by many people. Of course, if your aim is to decrease coaching salaries the best idea would be to pay players. Coaches can be worth a lot of money but some players are worth more.



It's hard to know what Coach Mendenhall meant with this quote as it was paraphrased, "It's amateur athletics, it's not professional, and I'm not for paying [the student-athletes]" but I would like a clarification as to why he thinks colleges should not pay athletes. In other words why is amateurism the goal. I've never heard anyone state the case for amateur athletics as the ideal.

JVQ,

My take is that it's just plain refreshing to watch a sport where the participants aren't paid to do what they love. Sure, the players could probably make a lot of money if the NCAA didn't have rules about paying athletes. While I'm a staunch advocate of capitalism, I believe the NCAA is well within their rights to ask that players receive no compensation other than a scholarship to play for their "amateur" programs. I totally agree with mendenhall. Those players that have walked on at BYU when they have the opportunity to play on scholarship elsewhere are my favorites.



If these players are worth so much, then some bright entrepreneurs need to get some individuals to pony up some dough in order to start a real NFL farms program where players could compete for money. No one has outlawed paying players. But the NCAA has put limits on what compensation a player can receive while playing for a college. I have a feeling that most would want to play for a school for "nothing" rather than a farm program.



Just as I've agreed to go through a residency where I'll be making far less than what I'm worth for medical training, these players have agreed to get an education and play a sport they love for less than they are worth. I'm totally fine with the way college athletics is set up.

Nothing like hanging a bullseye on your back. While I don't disagree with what Bronco said, I don't know that I would have said it.



I don't like TH saying:

"BYU athletic director Tom Holmoe said he doesn't believe the Cougars are currently worthy of a BCS spot. But Holmoe and Mendenhall hope that will change in the future."



It's not that it isn't the truth, but you don't always offer up the truth when you're in the public media context like he was. We deserve a BCS spot as much as over a dozen or more current BCS teams with Utah being one of those.



I would like to know also if BM imagines if this split of BCS and non-BCS teams does happen, if he expects BYU to be part of the have's or have nots or that is what he trying to do, to "earn" the status of the haves.



If that split ever does happen, there could easily be government legislative restrictions that come into play. While most of the Congress can look the other way when the BCS appears to be attempting to be equal in purpose, but really aren't, if they actually secede from the NCAA to form their own grou. It would be much more difficult for Congress then to look the other way.

Decloug,



First, let me say I love the walk-ons as well. Their success proves the point that effort is at least as important as talent. I think it would only be better to see a bunch of guys who aren't getting paid beat the guys who are.



I think your analogy of residency and college football is as close to perfect as an analogy can be. I finished my residency a little more than 2 years ago. Do you know the reason you have to do a residency to practice medicine is because physicians, medical schools and residency programs have formed a cartel (known as the AMA) backed by the individual state governments that limits the number of medical students and residency positions available? If I had decided after 18 or 24 months of my 5 year residency that I had learned enough and I wanted to go into practice there isn't anywhere in the country I would have been allowed to offer my services. The reason you are paid less than you are worth in residency is because the cartel inhibits competition. (BTW what are you doing for your residency?)



In the same way the universities form a cartel with respect to college athletics and limit entrance into the market of potential competitors. Now if every university were a private institution receiving no subsidies from government I would absolutely agree with you that they would be justified in limiting compensation any way they wanted. But the vast majority of these universities are government owned and should never have been in the business of athletics in the first place.



Just as the AMA has introduced unjust barriers to entry, so has the NCAA, so any entrepreneurs are at a distinct disadvantage when competing against the AMA or the NCAA.

jvquarterback wrote:
Decloug,



First, let me say I love the walk-ons as well. Their success proves the point that effort is at least as important as talent. I think it would only be better to see a bunch of guys who aren't getting paid beat the guys who are.



I think your analogy of residency and college football is as close to perfect as an analogy can be. I finished my residency a little more than 2 years ago. Do you know the reason you have to do a residency to practice medicine is because physicians, medical schools and residency programs have formed a cartel (known as the AMA) backed by the individual state governments that limits the number of medical students and residency positions available? If I had decided after 18 or 24 months of my 5 year residency that I had learned enough and I wanted to go into practice there isn't anywhere in the country I would have been allowed to offer my services. The reason you are paid less than you are worth in residency is because the cartel inhibits competition. (BTW what are you doing for your residency?)



In the same way the universities form a cartel with respect to college athletics and limit entrance into the market of potential competitors. Now if every university were a private institution receiving no subsidies from government I would absolutely agree with you that they would be justified in limiting compensation any way they wanted. But the vast majority of these universities are government owned and should never have been in the business of athletics in the first place.



Just as the AMA has introduced unjust barriers to entry, so has the NCAA, so any entrepreneurs are at a distinct disadvantage when competing against the AMA or the NCAA.

How many NCAA athletes have left early to go in the NBA or NFL draft and have ended up being busts? As a patient I'd rather know that my physician did complete the full 5 years of residency rather than wonder if they were an early entry bust...

What if I charged less than someone who has been a physician for several years? There is actually great data that shows doctors who have been out of residency 3-10 years have superior outcomes than those who have been out 1-3 or 10+ years (regardless of the length of their residency). But the AMA and the government prevent me from selling my services at a different rate than any other doctor.

jvquarterback wrote:
What if I charged less than someone who has been a physician for several years? There is actually great data that shows doctors who have been out of residency 3-10 years have superior outcomes than those who have been out 1-3 or 10+ years (regardless of the length of their residency). But the AMA and the government prevent me from selling my services at a different rate than any other doctor.

You don't sell black market body parts out of the back of your van do you?...



I typically don't price shop surgeons etc... Frankly if someone was offering a discount to get my business I would be concerned about why they had to offer reduced prices to get business.



If I was looking for a plastic surgeon to improve my wife's "assets" and I was comparing two surgeons who both left their residency early, I'd want to make sure I was getting LeBron James (equivalent surgeon) instead of Qwamby Brown (equivalent surgeon). If Qwamby Brown offered a discount to get my business I'd run.

There are plenty of people who price shop medical services. They ask their grandma for some home remedy and they pay nothing. Shouldn't they be able to pay someone just out of medical school or a PA or Nurse or someone else whatever they can afford and get infinitely better advice? Well too bad, the cartel that is the AMA prevents competition so if you're poor without insurance you're stuck with grandma.

No, I for one am glad that doctors have to meet certain standards before they can practice medicine on their own.



Also, this is very off topic. I'm close to either splitting off the medical posts to the lounge or simply deleting them.

I agree that they are off topic. I was just using decloug's analogy (which is a good one) between residency and public university athletic teams.



Back on topic, If you ever get a chance with your media pass I'd like you to ask Bronco for me why he thinks amateurism is the ideal for college athletics. Not whether it is the rule, but why (or if) he thinks the rule is a good rule.

I find jvquarterbacks constant suggestions that college football players be paid to be kind of annoying. I think college sports should be treated just as that, and there is room for amateur athletics in this world, even though the Olympics gave up on that a long time ago. I'm a fan of football and basketball, but I don't think all other sports should be sacrificed so that football and basketball players could be paid. I'm grateful for my scholarship in a non-revenue sport. I was able to get along just fine in school with that scholarship. To suggest (as many in the media have) that the football and basketball players just can't get along without getting paid is bunk. BYU does a great job of having strong, competitive teams in all sports. Any money paid to football and basketball players would have to come out of the other sports, or out of tithing money - not going to happen! So quit whining! Amatuer athletics is not professional! If you want to be professional, do it - just don't go to college and expect them to pay you.

I think Bronco would answer something like this: At BYU we want to develop young men and women who want to promote the values of BYU and the church. We think amateur athletics provides BYU athletes an opportunity to provide a service on behalf of the university and the church and helps the athletes become better people as a result. Which, as I've said in many other posts is great. It just doesn't fly at any university owned by the government.



It isn't that I think athletes should be paid, it is that I don't think the government should be in the business of preventing employment and inhibiting competition.



Think about that for a minute, the government, if it argues for amateurism, is arguing that athletes should remain among the unemployed.

IowaCougar, we're all pretty sick of it.

THe point of the article has been lost in this thread.

Bronco is calling out the coaches, Athletic depts, and boosters, and even the BCS, for the corruption of coaches receiving disproportionate compensation on the backs of the amateur, collegiate athletes. At some point 5mil is just way out of proportion.

Now most assuredly, someone will argue back that free market economics are in play and maybe there is some inconvenient truth to that. Or maybe it could be argued that if colloegiate coach pay was limited, all the "good coaches" would go pro. Great! let them! more true spirit of amateurism in the college ranks could only help decrease the corruption BM is referring to. My two cents.

So you've already got a bunch of teams "cheating" and paying players more than they "should." Now you want to limit coaching pay and open another area for people to "cheat." How are you going to police that any better than you do player compensation?

Put Bronco in charge! :-)

so let's get to what this is REALLY about: aliens living among humans prepping for colonization.



ok. not really. What is the biggest difference to you (generically) between the NFL and NCAA college sports? I mean, we have a working pro market that we can analyze where people ARE paid millions of dollars to play (coaches and players) and if we like the results, we should copy it.



I for one, find watching the NFL, faster, bigger, stronger but somewhat heartless. It seems like an ego show half the time with a few big name personalities on each team but mostly it seems like old guys trying to avoid injury so they can collect their paychecks. Isn't the average lifespan of a Pro player like 3 years? Sure they like winning and succeeding, but how often to you hear about player fines for 'skipping practice' or other infractions? So many don't care, it's just a job.



Why do I love the College athletics? Because it's your school man! NFL players are traded left and right, and they don't care about who ended up being the highest bidder. NCAA, you can't transfer (without huge penalties), you're offered the same scholarship, it's about the school.Many players know this is their only opportunity to be on a big stage and they lay their hearts out. Walk-ons fit this definition completely. Heart and soul guys which 4 times out of 10, will beat out the faster, bigger, stronger guys and makes for some amazing sports moments. Obviously cheating is hurting this ideal more than paying players, which is what Bronco is getting at, but I for one want the heart and soul guys on the field.

CougarClaw wrote:
so let's get to what this is REALLY about: aliens living among humans prepping for colonization.



ok. not really. What is the biggest difference to you (generically) between the NFL and NCAA college sports? I mean, we have a working pro market that we can analyze where people ARE paid millions of dollars to play (coaches and players) and if we like the results, we should copy it.



I for one, find watching the NFL, faster, bigger, stronger but somewhat heartless. It seems like an ego show half the time with a few big name personalities on each team but mostly it seems like old guys trying to avoid injury so they can collect their paychecks. Isn't the average lifespan of a Pro player like 3 years? Sure they like winning and succeeding, but how often to you hear about player fines for 'skipping practice' or other infractions? So many don't care, it's just a job.



Why do I love the College athletics? Because it's your school man! NFL players are traded left and right, and they don't care about who ended up being the highest bidder. NCAA, you can't transfer (without huge penalties), you're offered the same scholarship, it's about the school.Many players know this is their only opportunity to be on a big stage and they lay their hearts out. Walk-ons fit this definition completely. Heart and soul guys which 4 times out of 10, will beat out the faster, bigger, stronger guys and makes for some amazing sports moments. Obviously cheating is hurting this ideal more than paying players, which is what Bronco is getting at, but I for one want the heart and soul guys on the field.

This is why I love college sports much more than pro sports, and if college football were to become a job, I would stop loving it and stop watching it.

If they wanted college sports to remain amateur they should not televise them. It is the making money on college sports that drive its corruption.





Of course that would defeat BYU's purpose of spreading knowledge of the church.