Playing College Football Is An Honor, Not An Exploitation

Playing college football is an honor … not an exploitation.

Does that mean it’s perfect? Of course not. But far too often we confuse imperfection with evil. I spent four years playing quarterback at the University of Michigan, and, on most days, I was frustrated. Yet, navigating those frustrations, a thousand miles away from home, helped transform me from a high school boy into a disciplined young man.

Coming from a small, south Georgia town, the adventures of football gave me an opportunity to see the world on someone else’s dime. I ate prime rib at Lawry’s before running through the Rose Bowl tunnels, shook hands with Russell Crowe before taking my first snap in Michigan Stadium, and, most importantly, made lifelong connections with men I now regard as brothers. I don’t know how much money Michigan spent on me during those four years, but I know they extracted their return-on-investment in the form of blood, sweat, and tears. I regard that as a fair exchange. For those who view this life as a system of serfdom, don’t participate.

I’ve noticed a growing number of voices encouraging college football players to boycott unless they’re compensated monetarily, but there’s rarely a mention of the significant benefits already being provided, such as lodging, meals, medical bills, books, tuition, tutors and transportation. This begs the question: How much should student athletes be compensated in addition to these already included benefits, and at what cost?

Have we considered how a pay-for-play approach could eliminate non-revenue sports? Many of these programs are funded with football-generated dollars. Would revenue sharing prohibit programs from accepting walk-ons? I can tell you from experience, walk-ons are the heart and soul of every locker room. It’s true the demands of college athletics have increased over the decades, but so have the perks. Those who righteously advocate for radical change in any domain believe they can improve the pitfalls without incurring unforeseen negative consequences.

We also must recognize college programs offer more than classroom education. Think about the on-field education. Few players are gifted enough to maximize their talents without the proper instruction coaches provide. Some say, “football doesn’t need coaches or fans, only players.” This is true solely in the game’s backyard pickup form. If we want to relegate football to the backyard, so be it, but if young men still desire to play the sport for a living, or trade their talents for an education, then, yes, the game needs coaches, and fans, and trainers, and business experts.

None of these points should be viewed as an excuse for the NCAA over the past decades. Many of its decisions have been disappointing.

Here are potential solutions that could be implemented immediately:

• Separate NIL (name, image, likeness) from pay-for-play. It’s absurd to prevent athletes from capitalizing on autograph signings while allowing their classmates to monetize the same endeavor. This is different from pay-for-play. Once players receive a salary, they are professionals, which then makes termination possible.

• Continue examining the cost-of-attendance stipends that were implemented in 2015. Can these work without jeopardizing league parity?

• Allow players to transfer anywhere at any time with no penalty (provided they’re in good academic standing, etc.) If a coach can leave at any moment, players should be able to as well.

• Guarantee four-year scholarships when you sign a player rather than year-by-year contracts. (The Power Five conferences implemented a rule to this effect in 2015, which is great. Make it universal.)

• Create long-term medical plans for those who suffer life-altering injuries. (This was a benefit for some players at Michigan. I realize not all schools care for players in the same way.)

• Establish a minor league system for players who want to forego college. If I were Dwayne Johnson, and just purchased the XFL, I would not try to compete directly with the NFL. Instead, create a minor league system where young talent can prep for the professional league. Many think this would hurt college football. I disagree. While colleges would miss out on some surefire pro talent, they’d also free themselves from those who view the college experience as an exploitative enterprise.

As for whether or not playing football during a pandemic creates too much danger for players, there’s no easy answer. This country has certainly endured more severe hardships than a year without football. However, football will never be completely harmless even without the virus. Any game where you strap on armor to play is dangerous, and every player risks his life in myriad ways when he takes the field. That’s why we love it. That’s why we respect it. That’s why the market rewards the best of the best with more money than it does brain surgeons. Those are the rare few, though. The rest of us suit up because it’s an honor to play, and it’s an opportunity to better our lives, even without a financial fortune. For those who disagree, the solution is simple: Don’t play. Someone else will gladly take your place.

David Cone is the founder and chief executive of Cone Films, a multimedia production company. He was an all-state quarterback for Statesboro (Ga.) High School, and a two-year letterman for the University of Michigan.