I was fully prepared to put something together on my buddy Phill’s top 10 favorite sports-related Halloween costumes for this week’s column. Then I heard Florida State quarterback Jameis Winston’s name on ESPN, which, obviously, could only mean one thing — he’s done something stupid again.
(Speaking of which, Phill went as Reggie Bush for Halloween last year, in the hopes of meeting Sussex County’s equivalent of Kim Kardasian, even though his costume ended up looking more like Keith Hernandez wearing a New Orleans Saints jersey than anything else.)
While Phill’s poor Halloween costume choices can be excused, Winston’s poor choices off the field are getting harder and harder to. For once, though, I don’t know that I really fault him.
Winston is currently under investigation by FSU for his role in signing what is believed to be more than 900 items linked with James Spence Authentication — the company that certified more than 500 items signed by Georgia running back Todd Gurley, which resulted in Gurley’s suspension.
Signing autographs isn’t against the rules, but taking money for it is — which, guilty or not, should be cause enough to revisit the hot-button issue of whether or not NCAA athletes should be paid.
I can certainly see it from both sides. Athletes such as Winston and Gurley are on full scholarships, which, considering the cost of college tuition, can sometimes even equate to the yearly salary of the average American — at least the average salary of the average American without their college degree.
Not to mention that paying collegiate athletes would take all the purity out of the game and would almost certainly bring in all the antics and attitudes seen at the professional level. I mean, can you imagine Drew Rosenhaus making visits to Texas high schools and trying to sign 17-year-old quarterbacks in the hallway on their way to study hall? It just doesn’t seem right. The kid’s probably got an algebra test anyway. I doubt he has time to try and interpret the collective bargaining agreement.
I do think that there’s a compelling argument to be made for at least allowing athletes to take a cut from their own jersey and autograph sales, however. For one, the reason that Florida State sells so many jerseys with the number 5 on the back is because of Jameis Winston, not because it’s a prime number (I think). It only seems fair that he should see some of the loot.
But at the same time, being a poor college student is all part of the experience isn’t it? I remember playing club lacrosse at Lynchburg College (which admittedly, may be slightly less rigorous and stressful than playing quarterback for Florida State) and cashing in $20 checks from my grandma to scrounge together with my teammates for enough gas money to make it to UVA, where we were scheduled to play in the NCLL championship.
I’m sure I would have had a much easier time if I was cashing checks from sales of my jersey, which notably was also No. 5 (although I don’t think that would have helped my case) — but trying to figure out how we were getting to our next game was half the fun.
Who are we to rob Winston of that aspect of the college experience? Although he certainly had no qualms with robbing Publix for a chicken experience as a result of us not robbing him of his poor-college-student experience.
I think, ultimately, some kind of royalties agreement for college athletes’ jersey sales wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world and could even help convince some of them to stay and get their degrees, instead of leaving early for the pros, but I don’t know that they should ever get any kind of a paycheck.
Honestly, I could go back and forth on the pros and cons of this controversial subject all day, but I have to go see if I can find my old No. 5 jersey. Apparently Phill stole a bucket of chicken and wants to borrow it for his Jameis Winston Halloween costume this year.