ARMY Quarterbacks

[ARMORMAN]

P&D's recent post was sobering. The Golden Goose is dying a slow and agonizing death....

So here's a little lighter observation:

ARMY's top 4 Quarterbacks come from each of the 4 classes. Kind of unusual, but also excellent symmetry:

Dailey is a Senior

Coleman is a Junior

Hellums is a Sophomore

and

Washington is a Freshman

Pretty cool.

[kfan12]

P&D's recent post was sobering. The Golden Goose is dying a slow and agonizing death....

To which post are you referring?

[ARMORMAN]

This post (from P&D):


No doubt college football is undergoing revolutionary change. Some of it is for good reason. Some of it maybe not. This whole thing has been coming for a while but my contention is that once schools started selling tickets and popcorn for games then it was inevitably going to get to this point.

I contend that without some kind of government intervention and some kind of antitrust protection like Major League Baseball has that in a matter of years "College" football players will be employees and not students. They will have a Union and they will have a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) just like the NFL. The SEC and Big 10 will likely unite to become one governing body and collect all the revenues and will be modeled just like the NFL. This is my rough theory on where it's headed and not perfect by any measure. But in this scenario players will be employees, not students. Eligibility won't matter. Players will get relegated, some to the NFL if there is opportunity and money and some just will get cut. Some will get recruited in but I think that number is going to get smaller and smaller. Once there is a CBA the rosters will shrink as well. Will it go as far as 53 like the NFL? Doubtful but it won't be 105 if the players are fighting over a pot of money.

Now having said all that, here is how I think the SAs would survive if they saw fit. And boy are people going to hate this idea....players will be employees. So Army, Navy, AF, football players would be government contractors or even active duty officers. Depending on where you wound up with the teams left behind from the SEC and Big 10, our governing body could allow both. Now wait for it, instead of branching into Infantry or Field Artillery, you would branch into "USMA Athlete". Wild idea? Not really USMA Professors have a unique designation that allows them to stay and serve a specific functional purpose. Why not an athlete? Now ready for this? I imagine part of your commitment being that you had to make the team? In other words imagine we still bring in a large recruiting class. And guys develop and play for 4 years as students but then they compete with guys who have graduated. And let's say you are a 1st LT on your 7th year of football and you get beat out in camp to last year's senior. And there isn't a roster spot for you. Well off you go to OBC to fulfill your commitment and what's left or wherever the Army may need you. Or maybe you are 27 and played your full commitment of 5 years and are now out but still a great player and you now become a government contractor under contract with the AWPAA and get paid to play? I mean there are a ton of scenarios here but many could work. Im sure I'm missing a thousand challenges here so I look forward to hearing other ideas.

Ok, I know the argument about serving and what they signed up for. And I'm not saying I disagree. In a perfect world we could still do both. But what I think is going to happen is we will find out just how committed we are to having a platform on the national stage to promote the SAs. We can go the route of the ivies but we have some built in disadvantages vs them. Endowment is one and the unique idea of service to the nation is the other. And that service is often best displayed and that story told often times by the national attention the SAs draw through sports and particularly football. But we will have to address whether we value being in or out at some point in my opinion.

Ok lastly, I will say this. This whole thing is falling apart becuase schools turned football and basketball into a business and didn't share the revenues with their players. Even when the revenues per play far exceeded the value of the education. Of which many schools undermined the real education and its value any way (whole other topic). So the real question will be at what point does West Point and AFA and Navy have to deal with that issue? And maybe they don't but I wouldn't be surprised if at some point there's a specific lawsuit targeted at the revenue that is produced for these schools by these players. I'm not saying it's right I'm just saying I won't be surprised when that chicken comes home to roost.

This is all a mess and I'm afraid ruining what was at one point a fantastic product and an amazing sport for young men.

PD