I’m still receiving email responses from a column that was published two weeks ago. The topic: If college athletes become employees of a university, would they have to take classes?
The mere suggestion infuriated millions of my readers – or maybe, it was hundreds. I’m not that good with numbers.
But there is a significant divide between readers who cling to the amateur version of college sports, most notably football. They want to cheer for student-athletes who cherish their scholarship and love their school.
Sharon writes on Facebook: They should not be paid. They’re students. This is the dumbest thing yet.
Others might find that ludicrous. Since schools and coaches are making millions of dollars from television revenue, ticket sales and apparel sales, why shouldn’t they share the wealth with players?
Jim’s response to Sharon’s post: Except it isn’t. Deal with it. Billions are made on their backs every year. It takes a very brain-washed person to think the players who do all the work shouldn’t get their fair share.
There’s another segment of fandom that’s no longer engaged in the debate. Some fans send me emails saying they’re so turned off by where college football is headed, they’re opting out. They would prefer the NFL version of pro football.
Could enough fans become so disenchanted with college football that the sport might plummet in popularity?
Not a chance. For all the changes, the game itself remains wildly entertaining. In fact, college football has become too big to fail.
Networks don’t throw millions – “billions” was a bit of a stretch, Jim – of dollars at college football programs out of love for the sport. They’ve seen the numbers. They know how much people watch. They also know people are betting more than ever on college football. That also moves the needle.
My guess is they will watch and bet no matter how much money the participants might make − or whether there were an academic component to the competition.
I remember a long-ago conversation I had with Boyd McWhorter, who was the SEC commissioner from 1972 to 1986. I asked him if he thought more stringent academic standards might reduce the caliber of play and spectator interest.
He believed as long you had Alabama vs. Tennessee or LSU vs. Ole Miss – or any other SEC rivalry – people would watch, and they wouldn’t care if the best wide receiver ran a 4.4 40 or a 4.6 40 if the game were competitive.
I agreed with him that such longstanding rivalries – inside and outside the SEC – would always create interest and draw fans. I also believe that whether college football players are student-athletes or university employees that fans will keep coming.
ADAMS: If college athletes become employees, classes should be optional
For part of my career, I covered college games on Saturday and NFL games on Sunday. I always preferred the college game. I still do, even though it is now just a different version of pro football.
And once the game begins – and all the controversial issues fade into the background – the action should be as compelling as ever.
John Adams is a senior columnist. He may be reached at 865-342-6284 or john.adams@knoxnews.com. Follow him at: twitter.com/johnadamskns.
This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: The new version of ‘college’ football is too big to fail
Knox News | The Knoxville News-Sentinel