The Shill of the Game

No, that’s not a typo. These days, it seems, it is all about the dollars. Even in college sports - or maybe especially in college sports.

The headline on this week’s Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday Edition, blared “Raising Funds - and eyebrows” - the story about the push to raise money for colleges through athletics made the front page. It seems especially fitting to run the story during football season (and maybe just a little self-serving that it focused on Temple and Penn State Universities less than a week before the well-known Nittany Lions pick on the Owls in Philadelphia) but it’s hardly news. The role of the dollar in college sports has been under fire for more than a year now, from the IRS inquiry into whether the tax-exempt status of colleges should remain considering the “empires” that have been built on the backs of taxpayers to the controversial salaries paid to coaches to Congress’ debate about the role of sports in secondary education - including basketball. What has come out of this debate is largely nothing - a lot of drama on both sides about the value (or not) of sports programs at colleges and universities. While there should be pressure to answer this debate in a very public way, there isn’t. Perhaps it’s impolitic to do it with football play-offs looming in the distance - too many OSU fans in Congress (yes, that’s OSU pictured above)? And then there’s basketball… And then, baseball. It’s just so darned inconvenient. Only Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) has dared bring it up again recently; he promised last month to take another look at whether tax-exempt status was appropriate - but then, who are we kidding? He went to the University of Northern Iowa.

Despite the odd criticisms, the cash continues to pile up at these schools. That Inquirer story that I mentioned earlier reported on an all day seminar for Penn State coaches to learn how not to coach, but to solicit donations to the tune of $100 million. And they’re hardly alone. Athletic departments at colleges and universities now count on their staff to raise money.

Of course, there are donations and then there are donations. Schools like the University of Tennessee realize how to get the most dollars from their donors - like other schools, UT requires a substantial donor commitment to secure good seats for season tickets for football season: $25,000 and five years. Interesting, isn’t it, that a $25,000 “donation” to the Vols qualifies for a tax deduction even though the donor intent is hardly charitable.

Not true, you say? Of course it is. In 1998, 85% of all donations to colleges and universities were nonathletic. In 2003, that number had decreased to 74%. In contrast, money donated directly to school athletics programs has skyrocketed with contributions soaring at more than $30 million at the University of Virginia, Louisiana State University, Stanford and more. If alums are feeling more charitable, it likely has to do with those restrictions to get season tickets and new capital projects for stadiums.

I don’t know what the answer is. I know that it costs money to run a program. And I know that programs attract students (my brother wanted to go to UNC at Chapel Hill because of Sam Hill, Michael Jordan and Dean Smith). And maybe that’s a good thing.

But here’s the other part. I love sports. I love college sports. I love that, in some colleges, kids still love to play the game and aren’t sucked into their own press and the lure of money that surrounds the game a la Reggie Bush. There’s a reason it’s called amateur. It was never supposed to be about the money.

That’s naive, I know. Money will change the game.

But for now, maybe somewhere there are still some kids playing because they like to play. And maybe there’s a coach that will just let them do it.

Go Owls.

digg_url = ‘http://digg.com/football/The_Shill_of_the_Game’;