MYLES BRAND WORRIED ABOUT SALARIES. HA.
Myles Brand–punchline!
NCAA president Myles Brand expressed concern Thursday about coaches’ salaries, but said it was up to schools and universities to police themselves when it comes to hires.

Women be shoppin’…oh, yeah, women be shoppin!
We’re mailing Brand a blue helmet as we speak, since the NCAA is rapidly entering UN peacekeeper territory here. Brand makes, with benefits, three-quarters of a million dollars a year for heading up an organization whose purpose he can’t define. They’ve also been under investigation twice in the past year regarding their non-profit status, something they combatted by paying $160,000 to lobbyists in Washington to protect said status.

Just another vaguely defined non-profit it reminds us of…
They also make millions from the NCAA tournament, their cash cow, which in no way resembles a professional sporting event, either. We play ping-pong to ecstatic thousands at the Georgia Dome every Thursday, in case you’re interested. But let Myles go on:
“I think we have to begin asking some very hard questions,” Brand said. “It raises the question of propriety for colleges and universities. Is this the appropriate thing to do within the context of college sports?”
Billy Donovan, Florida basketball coach, will enter football coach level-salary whatever happens to him post-tourney. Either Florida’s paying him jillions, or Kentucky’s paying him jillions. You will hear nothing about that, however, because the NCAA funds its amorphous activities via the Big Dance. The NCAA makes nothing close to this from football, who farms its postseason out to a cartel of schools without the NCAA’s logo and involvement.
Greed with the NCAA logo? Integrity-laden excitement. Greed without it? An “arms race” threatening the very integrity of college academics.
No, but please…go on, Mr Annan Brand. We’re about to soil ourselves with the next quote. It’s like you’re watching It’s a Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad World, and Jonathan Winters is about to demolish a gas station singlehandedly. This is the best part! Hell, watch that first, reader. You’ll laugh without cynicism first, then read Brand second and trot out the bitter laugh.
Now, Brand:
But he said the NCAA has no ability to regulate salaries, and plays only a limited role in how its schools finance athletics. Still, he said, it was troubling to see some college coaches making more money than their counterparts in pro sports.
Oh, just sit back. It’s like a fine Brunello, isn’t it? Refined raw attitude, little wood and berry on the palate with hint of leather…exquisite, really. Brand spends nights mourning the death of collegiate athletics because some pro coaches don’t make as much as college coaches. Imagine him weeping into his gold thread sheets and pining over the fate of Mike Holmgren, since Brand makes more than most normal CEOs, and more than some college coaches he’s so concerned about.
For running an organization that makes arcane rules, protects its non-profit status via government lobbying (think Senators get nice seats at the Final Four? Sure they do), and hawks one massive basketball tourney as its primary source of revenue, Brand gets paid more than your run-of-the-mill neurosurgeon. And he doesn’t even have a proper job description, since no one can define exactly what the NCAA does anyway.
As head of a regulator without enforcement power, a corporation with a brand that doesn’t pay taxes, and CEO of a company without a mission statement, Brand’s really entered rare air here. A blue helmet may be the only logical costume if and when his tenure ends at the NCAA, since the United Nations is the only organization more messily defined, heavily bankrolled, and exempt from regulation from an outside source. Brand does well enough shrugging as the money rolls around at the NCAA; he’d look just as magisterial parking his car illegally on a New York street next to some Nigerian diplomat’s limo.












50
Where do you work, Meg? My company would have control over any patents I file.
Musicians rarely own their own music (but somehow I’m “stealing from artists” according to the RIAA whenever I download a song off the internet or listen on YouTube).
Almost nobody owns their own work.
Comment by J.J. — April 1, 2007 @ 9:21 pm
49
Brand gets his nightly pleasures from photoshopped pictures of Mike Dubose, Andy Sorensen, and Gene Marsh.
Comment by Rogers Redding — April 1, 2007 @ 8:44 pm
48
for what it is worth, athletes aren’t the onlt ones getting the shaft. Any research that goes on at a college is the property of that college. So if you come up with a very profotable invention/discovey, guess who has the rights to making money from it. That’s right- the university. However, since they put up a lot of the starting costs, even if the grant money pays most of the running costs, then I guess I can see the logic. Athletics work the same way. The school is giving them the best equipment, the training table, and the expert coaching, not to mention the marketing exposure that allows them to gain access to the top draft status that mythical cash cow, the signing bonus which is the only guaranteed money in the NFL. Football is a completely different game from Bball. I think very few NFL teams would pony up the big bucks to a skinny 18 year old kid with no technique when it would mean they would then have to coach them up for 2-3 years before they would really being able to contribute to the pro teams. They would need a minor league like MLB. But why bother with that expense when the colleges are doing it wfor you?
Comment by Meg — March 31, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
47
“Our point is exactly that–it’s not an amateur operation. It’s a professional operation with a semi-pro mask.”
Fair enough.
Comment by Daniel Adams — March 31, 2007 @ 11:38 am
46
Orson,
What reason do you have to believe that Myles’s motives aren’t what he says–namely, to support the integrity of the game and help our student-athletes? You’re just so…so cynical.
Comment by J.J. — March 30, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
45
Baconboy (re: your #32 post) - I’m not even clicking on that link for fear of seeing Jimmy Clausen in a speedo. Believe me, Yost and Benny’s coverage of a mistaken Clausen pic on MZone the last couple days has burned my retina quite sufficiently.
Comment by Out of Conference — March 30, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
44
It’s great for everyone to get on their white horse and mourn the loss of CFB’s virginity and how we should really do something about having CFB sign a Second Virginity Vow by reeling in coach’s salaries. However, while the athletes may be amatuers, for the school it’s a business and a really important one. If you aren’t Harvard, Princeton, or Yale, you aren’t putting butts in the lecture halls and $$s in the coffers on your academic reputation. You’re doing it with marketing. For major state-assisted (what a joke) schools, the way they get their names out there is through athletics. At schools with very successful “brands”, they collect huge revenues which are used not only to support the athletic programs of the 90% of student athletes whose sports bleed money, they also support things like faculty salaries, which some people consider important.
These revenues come from TV money, Ticket sales/allumni “gifts”, and licensing revenue. You drive all of those by having people want to buy your brand, just like any other business. And just like any other business, if you want to make the most money, you’re going to have to pay for the best people.
Kevin Garnett make $25M a year at 18 coming out of high school for playing basketball IN MINNESOTA. Yes, what we as Americans place value on is f*cked up, but why does everyone feel the need to point college coaches out as special for some reason? They work for businesses that need to make money to support the part of the business (the actual educational institution) that is seriously lacking in money.
Comment by PeterPumpkinhead — March 30, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
43
Am I the only one who gets nervous when a bunch of fired-up Southerners threaten secession? Would this make Myles Brand the James Buchanan in this analogy?
C’mon — I want to see a post on compact theory as applied to D-IA (or, as it’s now called, the Football Bowl Subdivision) conferences.
Comment by Newspaper Hack — March 30, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
42
Baconboy, glad to hear that your injury worries are more esoteric than having a bad limp for life.
JohnWA, you’re no doubt right about the overhead costs of a football player being higher than that of a graduate student. However, both of them have some potential economic value to the university, and a successful football program probably yields direct and indirect returns over the investment cost.
Most PhD students wouldn’t bother if there wasn’t some form of tuition remission because the career economics don’t support it - in other words, only a very few would put themselves into that degree of debt to earn less than $40k / year to start in the humanities.
So, the university is giving up very little by not charging the apprentice academics, because they don’t represent much in the way of lost revenue. What they do represent is cheap labor in the form of people who are willingly taking a pittance to be an apprentice because they hope to join the guild.
But there’s variation in grad student pay rates depending on the popularity and outside funding support of their field. The only semester I broke into making a fourth figure a month (before the decimal) was when I was working a second teaching job. My friends in physics and applied math earned something closer to a living wage, partly because they brought grants money to the university that could be skimmed to cover “overhead.”
By that standard, you could argue that apprentice athletes, which is what football players mostly are at larger universities, are entitled to a decent stipend, possibly greater than they make now, even if it’s not pro-levels of compensation. There’s already market variations in salaries on the academic side based on revenue for the university, so it’s not like it would be grossly unfair to do the same thing for student athletes.
If you accept the notion that certain athletes can get stipends while others do not, then you’ve already accepted that they can get paid, which makes them semi-professional in my book. From there, it’s more of an ethical or aesthetic argument about how much they get paid.
Comment by DC Trojan — March 30, 2007 @ 2:04 pm
41
Our point is exactly that–it’s not an amateur operation. It’s a professional operation with a semi-pro mask.
Brand’s fretting over salaries strikes us as hypocritical a.) because of the huge salary he pulls down, and b.) the NCAA’s very professional sale and sponsorship of basketball’s big playoff.
He then has the gall to fret over the money boosters happily put up from their own pockets to fund these semipro teams.
Again, don’t put us there with the academic integrity protesters. It’s well past that point now.
Comment by Orson Swindle — March 30, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
40
Miles is a hipocrate and doesn’t endear himself to anyone in the sporting public, and the NCAA is universally unpopular. But does anyone else here believe the NCAA performs (however badly) a necessary function? Do we really want unlimited booster cash determining where recruits go? Athletes who don’t have to go to class at all? Coaches who require 50 hours of practice and film a week? All pro, international, olympic, and youth sports have governing bodies that set rules and enforce them to attempt to keep the playing field relatively level. The NCAA is seriously flawed, but the dirty little job has to be done.
Comment by Sam — March 30, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
39
“He draws a huge salary for doing…something, while slamming football coaches who actually could tell you their job description.”
I agree, and that sucks, but somewhere in there, Brand is making a decent point. I love college football, something just isn’t right about it. As you guys say all the time, recruiting is creepy, but so is the vast quantities of money changing hands in an ostensibly amateur operation.
Comment by Daniel Adams — March 30, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
38
I thought a lot of athletes did get some kind of stipend from some sort of grants and such. There is a big difference between getting compensated with a small stipend and getting paid commensurate with the money they bring into the school. One merely puts them on the same relative scale as their peer group. The other makes them professional athletes.
I would also say that supporting a top athlete on a full scholarship costs a lot more than the $28K or so you get in tuition as a grad student. Even taking away the coaching staff salaries, between equipment, food, travel ,and tutors, a university is well beyond the cost of tuition.
Comment by JohnWA — March 30, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
37
Bama Fan Chip On Should Alert!
It’s okay when Oklahoma and ND pay a coach over three million a year, but as soon as Bama pays four a year there’s a problem.
thanks EDSBS for exposing their ridiculous hypocrisy as it relates to basketball.
I’m more than ready to secede from the NCAA.
Comment by bama_buck — March 30, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
36
**RED ALERT**
Just saw on another site that “Tim Tebow and two other big guys decked out in UF stuff” were spotted on the UGA campus in Athens. Better hope nobody gets the urge to take a less than private tinkle or whip out a fake ID…
Comment by Because They Can — March 30, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
35
reading the Cory Brewer story really makes me want to piss on Myles’ face
Comment by matt — March 30, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
34
DC Trojan, my Ph.D. will be in theology, so the only injury will be to my eternal soul!
Really, I don’t see why athletes can’t get the same kind of stipends that graduate students get. Even if I TA, I still get paid (even if it is a pittance).
Comment by baconboy — March 30, 2007 @ 1:10 pm
33
I look forward to Orson’s coverage of the Oil for Final Four Tickets scandal.
Comment by DevilGrad — March 30, 2007 @ 1:09 pm
32
Orson, does this mean that Jimmy Clausen can never do anything to earn Fulmer Cup points?
http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/?p=2323
Comment by baconboy — March 30, 2007 @ 1:04 pm
31
If Baconboy, as a PhD student, is conducting lab research or working as a TA, he’s also supporting - at a minimum - cost avoidance by doing work for a pittance. (Or, as we used to say, you’re not underemployed, you’re an inflation-buster.)
If he’s working on a grant-funded project, then not only is he providing cheap labor but the university is making money off him as well… sounds rather like he’s a football player, actually, but without the crippling injuries.
Unless of course you’re like those laser-using engineers and physicists I knew who couldn’t focus straight ahead because of all the laser-reflection injuries to their eyes because they couldn’t be bothered to wear goggles.
Comment by DC Trojan — March 30, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
30
I’m too lazy to look: where did MB end up in the Punch-Out Bracket? Should be pretty high up there.
Thanks for the Mad Mad World reference. That is one of the funniest movies of all time! It’s the 1963 Cannonball Run.
Comment by tOSU_radar — March 30, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
29
That athlete wears a speedo, and not shoulder pads. Therefore, no FC points.
Comment by Orson Swindle — March 30, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
28
I think AU should get FC Pts. because, like CapstoneAlum pointed out, there are many AU folks who are waaaayyy to proud of the swimming team. That’s like Bama people talking smack about the gymnastics team.
Back to the thread, I think there should be a limit on coaches’ salaries…but seriously it’s ridiculous how bad Brand and the NCAA hate Alabama. It’s like that guy in the movie Old School who gains a position of power over the cool guys who used to make fun of him when they were younger…that’s Miles Brand and the NCAA.
Miles “CheeeEeeese” Brand
Comment by Cardiac Kids — March 30, 2007 @ 12:49 pm
27
Josh…good points, but it’s not a compensation you can actually spend. I’m working on a Ph.D. right now (getting trained by experts in a clearly defined field) and get free tuition, worth about $28K — it definitely beats taking on debt. But, at the same time, I can’t spend it. Trust me, there’s a big difference between compensation you can use to by groceries and compensation that doesn’t really cost the university much to offer. But the other issue, in regard to the athletes, is that it doesn’t really pay them what they are worth.
How much, for instance, was Corey Brewer worth to UF over the last year (Noah and Horford probably wouldn’t have come back if Brewer went pro)? Yet read this:
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaab/news;_ylt=Ao7YZI2×8oH5_QexOQCh9sc5nYcB?slug=jo-coreybrewer033007&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Brewer made his choice (and I’ve made mine), but in Brewer’s case and it is just wrong that he doesn’t get some kind of money he can actually spend as part of benefit.
Again, many Ph.D. students receive a stipend above and beyond their free tuition, so why can’t our athletes?
Comment by baconboy — March 30, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
26
It may be a marginal additional cost for a university to give away a full-ride scholarship, baconboy, but it’s a definitive form of compensation for the athlete receiving the scholarship. Especially when you consider that the athlete isn’t just receiving a free education, but also training in a clearly defined field (i.e., football/basketball/baseball,etc) from not just one, but a team of experts that aren’t available to the general student population.
Comment by JohnWA — March 30, 2007 @ 12:31 pm