As House v. NCAA settlement goes into effect, cheating likely to persist

We’ve heard change is coming.

In a few days, the House v. NCAA settlement goes into effect. College sports will then enter a new era with significant changes in financial compensation for athletes.

But don’t be too concerned about all the impending changes. Some things won’t change. There will still be pageantry, rabid fan bases, championship games and, of course, cheating.

That won’t go away. The old saying in college sports is if you ain’t cheating, you ain’t trying. Whether it be football, basketball, baseball or probably anything else, colleges will all be “trying.” Some just try harder than others.

Texas A&M Director of Athletics Trev Alberts acknowledged as much earlier this week when discussing the upcoming changes brought on by the settlement.

“Are we ever gonna stop (somebody) from taking a brown paper bag of money and giving it to a player?” Alberts asked rhetorically. “We can’t.”

Those who live in a Utopian world with unicorns may wonder if that would be the case. After all, college programs now have $20.5 million to share with athletes. Why cheat, then?

Anybody who’s ever taken a job for more money knows the answer. And throughout the history of college football, there has always been a bag man lurking in the shadows to offer more money.

An extra $10 grand — or much more — on the side might convince a recruit or transfer which program to join.

The guess here is that most illegal activity will be done under the guise of Name, Image & Likeness (NIL). A few years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that athletes can profit from NIL. Many have and still will.

Kay Naegeli, TexAgs

On Monday, Trev Alberts told the media that Texas A&M will fully fund 410 scholarships for the 2025-26 academic year, an increase from 255.20.

Business-owning boosters have offered big money for endorsements from star athletes. There’s nothing illegal about that.

However, under the House settlement, the accounting firm of Deloitte will act as an independent clearinghouse to ensure NIL deals represent fair market value.

But what if Oregon decides it needs a quarterback? What’s stopping Nike Chairman Phil Knight, a wealthy Oregon booster, from extending a seven-figure endorsement deal to a prospect? Who’s to say that’s fair market value for a Nike commercial?

That might not even be against the rules. But what if Auburn approached Apple CEO Tim Cook, an Auburn grad, about a similar deal and offered to fund it?

A university official contacts a big business, such as American Express or General Motors… You get the idea. The official asks the business to offer a player $1 million endorsement deal. The university then offers to funnel the $1 million to the company.

No doubt, even more creative ways will be schemed to move money under the table. Alberts knows this.

“Our culture in college athletics is ‘tell me the rules so I can get busy working on a strategy to circumvent them,’” he said. “We’re never going to get where we need to go in college athletics if we don’t recognize that.

“If there’s anything that should have taught us that it’s the unregulated market of the last three or four years. Everybody wants to be governed. We just want to make sure other conferences are governed, too.

“But will there be ways around it? Will there be people that test it? Absolutely?”

Alberts said there will be harsh penalties for violators. He said a new breed of diligent NCAA investigators will be waiting to identify and punish programs and coaches who break rules.

We’ve heard that before, right? The old NCAA wasn’t hesitant to deal out punishment. It’s just that the severity of punishments seemed to change depending on the offender.

Remember the line from old UNLV coach Jerry Tarkanian? “The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky that they're going to give Cleveland State two more years of probation.”

Need an example closer to home? In 1994, the NCAA ruled that some Texas A&M football players were paid for work that wasn’t done in a summer construction job. Never mind that other workers who were not athletes were also paid.

That didn’t matter to the NCAA, which banned A&M from competing for the Southwest Conference championship or playing in a bowl game. The Aggies, by the way, were undefeated that season.

Fast forward a dozen years. In 2006, Oklahoma quarterback Rhett Bomar, offensive lineman J.D. Quinn and a walk-on were found to have been paid for work not performed by a Norman car dealership.

Oklahoma received a public reprimand and lost two scholarships for the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons.

Alberts acknowledged that there cannot be similar disproportionate punishments moving forward.

“I will tell you — and I pray that it’s not Texas A&M, and we’re working hard to make sure it’s not —but you’re going to have to have a ‘brand’ school get a penalty that’s significant and it sticks,” Alberts said. “And you may have to do it more than once.”

Is Alberts really suggesting higher-profile programs be held to the same standard and face the same sanctions if caught cheating?

That would be nice for a change.