The double standards of college football coaches, who grumble about the difficulties of maintaining a team in the age of the transfer portal and NIL, are glaring. These coaches have historically wielded power over players, determining their futures and withdrawing scholarships at will.
However, now that players can shape their own futures and profit from their own images, coaches are feeling the heat. The NCAA’s greed and unwillingness to distribute the wealth generated by college sports have led to this predicament. Players should have the right to vie for their services and not be held captive by coaches who put their own interests first. A growing chorus of voices is calling for a shift in the power balance in college football.
The transfer portal, which allows college athletes to switch schools without having to take a year off, has made it simpler for dissatisfied players to leave. This has put coaches under pressure to continually recruit and keep players, leading to grievances about the challenge of maintaining a team.
Let’s face it, some coaches are better recruiters than they are coaches. Meaning there will be players in their programs that did not receive the experience that they were sold on the recruiting trail. In those instances, it makes sense for a collegiate athlete that has 5-to-play-4 to find greener pastures.
The funny thing is that Coaches will try to make a student-athlete seem mentally weak, or disloyal if they decide to leave the program. That same coach will run faster than Usain Bolt to move up in the coaching ranks or make more money.
These challenges are a byproduct of the system that college football coaches have long exploited, and they should adjust to the evolving landscape rather than bemoan it. The irony of coaches who have capitalized on their players’ skills now feeling the strain of player empowerment might also be noted.
Moreover, the NIL rules now permit college athletes to earn money from their name, image, and likeness, giving players more influence and control over their own careers. Coaches who have long profited from the unpaid work of their players are now confronted with a new reality where athletes have more power and independence.
What are the players looking for?
They want Development, Opportunity, and Playing Time.
Can they improve in their position under this Coach and this program?
Will they have a chance to grow and play?
Determining playing time can be more complex, but if the coach and his program have clear guidelines about how players get on the field, it’s not that difficult. Some programs rely on seniority and merit to decide who plays, while others purport to focus solely on merit. Most Coaches will assert that they don’t engage in politics, but this is true for only a handful.
However, players and their parents repeatedly recount tales of Daddy Ball, Politics, and a system of favoritism. Whether it’s the Coach’s child getting the lion’s share of opportunities at a specific position, or the legacy family that also happens to be major contributors to the school or program, or the politics of the feeder program from which a kid hails, or the influence that his former coach may wield.
