Thats right kids, communications giant SBC paid over a million dollars have sponsorship rights to the Michigan vs Ohio State game for the next two seasons. The plus side to this is both schools will receive over $500,000 for their general scholorship funds. The bad news is, SBC is going to make SOOO much more off of the game than the $1,000,000 they are paying for it. What do you guys think about companies buying sponsorship rights to single games throughout the season, as opposed to just bowl games.

how is it bad news for sbc to make money?

Actually, the schools announced yesterday this isn't going to happen. Lloyd Carr, Jim Tressell and alum and boosters from both schools were pissed. The schools backed out.

Hmmm, the NCAA says no to individual college kids, making a buck of their OWN name to support olympic endeavours, yet, they continue to prostitute out the players and the universities.

I'm sure that money will be spent on the library.


Call college athletes what they are....PROFESSIONALS. There isn't any incentive to stay in college. You can come back after making millions and finish school if you want. Why stay and let the schools and the NCAA prostitute you and your talent out with all the risk on your own body without paying you anything but tuition and board?

Sucks for SBC this season, that game is meaningless, except for the fact that 60,000 some odd people attend each in any given year so the ratings will always be huge.


Further proof that the NCAA is an outdated institution that is in decay.

Because SBC would make millions out of the deal, but yet the players in the game get...nothing. Its an overall exploitation of athletes by the NCAA, everyone makes money, except for the ones doing the work.

yeah, a free education.

what a joke.

A free education, which most of them arent there for. Especially when alot of those teams, have a graduation rate of like 50%. People are there to play for a spot in the NFL. And a free education is nothing when a school makes between $15-20 Million for a major bowl game. College sports, especially Football, is all about making money for the schools, they really dont give a fuck about their players, as long as they can run pass and catch well.

In a good year, I get to watch UT play in the SBC Red River Shootout, and in a very special year, the Dr Pepper Big XII championship game. It really hasn't effected the quality of play on the field. The Red River Shootout has had corporate sponsorship of one kind or another since like 1995. Who cares? There wouldn't be college sports without huge paydays, that's why the real students at major football universities have such great facilities.

i don't understand this.

i played high school football, nobody paid me! i feel exploited.

to say most of them aren't there for an education is ignorant. about 250 players are drafted each year, which equals to about 2 players per college team.

What is wrong with the schools making money and putting that money towards scholarship programs. Remember, for most schools, football is what pays the bills for other sports.

But with a graduation rate of 50% or even lower, that proves that alot of the players really arent there for an education either.

that does not prove anything.

it may mean though that many of the players are ill-suited for the demands of college.

It's ashamed, the NCAA is allowed to make all the money they want off of college athletes, yet those same athletes are banned from getting jobs in the off season or making any money at all off of thier OWN likeness.

The way the NCAA treats cases like Jeremy Bloom's recent bid to play college football yet, in his private life make sponsorship money to finance his Olympic Skiing endeavours is attrocious.

It's essentially telling college athletes, signing a scholarship is slavery.

We'll pay for your tuition, but in return you'll make us millions, but you can't cash in on your own name or athletic effort because that's wrong. If you sign a scholarship you work for us only. It would seem to me the incentive to stay in college is nil for a talented athlete. You can always get your education after you cash in on your athletic talents, because if you are that good, no amount of education is going to make you more money than you will make in professional sports. For the thousands who aren't the A list athletes, it's probably a pretty good deal, but it's still ridiculous they can't cash in on their own name, likeness, and athletic talent if there is a market for it. I don't have a problem with College Football funding other sports or scholarships or whatever, I have a problem with the NCAA preventing people from trading on thier own name, while simultaneously profiting on that same person.

I don't see why bloom didn't do something similiar to Ricky Williams and Cedric Benson, whom both played pro baseball in the offseason, and simply went non-scholarship.

Both of you make excellent points. I'd like to subscribe to your newsletters.

Probably should have, maybe he will although I think he wasn't sponsored until his last year.

Either way, with video games, jerseys and the like being profited on by various groups trading on these peoples athletic talents and images, why are the players responsible not able to make a percentage?

How many jerseys with Williams or Benson's numbers found there way on the backs of folks walking around Austin or across the country?

I know you can't buy a UGA jersey that isn't a David Greene 14 or David Pollack 47 here in Georgia.

Obviously there's a market for their talents they are not amateurs from the moment they sign the scholarship to attend school, why then is it wrong for them to trade on thier own likeness?

He COULD have done that, but the point is he SHOULDNT HAVE to do that. The money he made off of his skiing endorsements has NOTHING to do with how well he plays football.