Good Could Come From Todd Gurley Case If NCAA Cared

By Brandon Daniel @Brandon_Rant on October 14, 2014

Much ink has been spilled over the last week since the Georgia Bulldogs indefinitely suspended star tailback Todd Gurley. Most are of the same opinion that Gurley exercised poor judgment knowing the rules but also believe it underscores the hypocrisy of the NCAA. What’s missed here is that the NCAA could enact rule changes that could do real good to athletes and the world.

At this point, a majority of people believe college athletes should be allowed to profit off of their name and image. I have been against the idea of schools paying players. There seems to me too much complication, and if schools are going to pay players, I believe the NFL and NBA should just begin their own minor league systems like MLB.

I for one still believe in the idea of the student-athlete and devaluing a five- or six-figure education sends the wrong message to our young people. It should factor heavily into the package that schools are allowed to offer their athletes.

But when it comes to players earning off their name apart from the school, I believe we should swing the door wide open. Here’s why.

Of course the main article remains valid. Players work hard and earn their good names so therefore they should be allowed to benefit off of it. And there is a way that this can be used to impact the communities and institutions these players are living in.

What if the NCAA allowed athletes to earn money off of their good names, with the requirement that a set percentage of those earnings be given to charity of some kind? The NCAA could promote goodwill and service, benefit great causes and help their student-athletes all at the same time.

There are many ways this could be orchestrated. The athlete could choose a charity of their choice; it could be based on their school’s already existing partnerships or maybe it could go into a trust to help their fellow athletes who won’t get the same notoriety. The possibilities are endless and much good could come from it.

It doesn’t have to be just about lining athletes’ pockets. This can be an opportunity to make a real difference.

And don’t worry about it affecting recruiting. The athletes should have to earn it. Allow this to begin after they have spent one year on campus, making it negligible to recruiting and also giving athletes something to work towards.

It would also give universities the chance to educate their student-athletes on what they are allowed to do and help them tap into a reputable network of alumni and supporters who would jump on board with making a difference. And it would teach them to stay away from shady memorabilia dealers who just want to take advantage of them.

Student-athletes do get a free education and that can’t be understated, but they also can’t work the part-time jobs that their peers can because of the demands on their time. Allowing them to earn money off of autographs, speaking engagements and appearances is a good compromise and adding the charitable aspect keeps the money earned from getting out of hand.

There are undoubtedly issues with this plan, as well as others floating out there. But the point is the NCAA could think outside the box and, for a change, do something that impacts the world in a positive way rather than just impacting the bottom line.

I doubt they will do it, but isn’t it worth the conversation?