Skip to content

Channing Crowder hints that he sold memorabilia in college

crowder8000_460974c Getty Images

The first installment of Channing Crowder’s show on WQAM in Miami, co-hosted by our buddy Zach Krantz, already has generated a couple of news items.  First, Crowder talked about his reaction to those who hate and/or hate on him.  Next, Dolphins running back Ronnie Brown, a guest on the maiden voyage, called in to talk about his future.

There’s one more worth mentioning, as partially transcribed by Omar Kelly of the South Florida Sun-Sentinel.

Talking about the issue of former Ohio State quarterback Terrelle Pryor selling his jerseys and other game-worn items, Crowder made this disclosure regarding his time with the Florida Gators.

“I’ll say hypothetically I don’t have any of my Florida jerseys,” Crowder said.  “There were some Jacksonville businessmen who liked my play.”

Crowder sees no problem with players finding a way to generate some money, given the revenue they generate for their schools.  And we agree.

“I know why [Jim] Tressel got in trouble. He was lying,” Crowder said.  “But Pryor can’t sell his own stuff?  It’s his!”

For now, Pryor can’t sell his own stuff because the NCAA says he can’t.  But given the inability of schools to pay football players without paying all other athletes, male and female, one way to allow star athletes to generate revenue without running afoul of Title IX possibly could come from allowing players to sell their gear and/or their autographs and/or their names and/or their likenesses.  All players, regardless of sport or gender, would have that right.  Sign things, sell things, appear in commercials, get paid.  The market determines who gets how much, and a loose sense of fairness would arise, with the players most responsible for filling the seats and raising the profile of their programs getting the most money.

Until then, Crowder’s comments further confirm that the only difference between guys like Reggie Bush and Terrelle Pryor and many other big-name, big-time college football players is that Bush and Pryor got caught.

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, Miami Dolphins, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors
22 Responses to “Channing Crowder hints that he sold memorabilia in college”
  1. eeerockski says: Jun 27, 2011 12:16 PM

    The players should be allowed to sell their own stuff at least. I mean sure, they should be grateful for the scholarships they get, most of us never sniff that kind of thing, but with school and football, how much time do they really have to get a 9-5? Gotta pay the bills somehow! The NCAA should do something about that aspect because it sounds to me that most of what Tressel was doing was taking the fall for his young men.

  2. citizenstrange says: Jun 27, 2011 12:18 PM

    Say this three times fast:

    Channing Crowder sold clam chowder.

  3. thereisalwaysnextyear says: Jun 27, 2011 12:43 PM

    “For now, Pryor can’t sell his own stuff because the NCAA says he can’t.”

    That’s not right. Actually Pryor can sell whatever he wants now. He’s not part of the NCAA anymore.

  4. mackie66 says: Jun 27, 2011 12:47 PM

    These kids are not the bad guys. I was once a young freshman going to school, playing football and working three (3) part time jobs to pay the bills. They have to have some money to live on. Dorms are ok, but that doesnt pay for social events. If the old tired men in the NCAA dont fix this thing its only going to get worse.

  5. marvsleezy says: Jun 27, 2011 12:47 PM

    Shouldnt the college ask for the jersey back just like in high school? Can you sell a jersey after every game?

    Im not saying its right or wrong, just that the college is in on this too by turning their heads.

  6. holdthemayo123 says: Jun 27, 2011 12:47 PM

    without these colleges showcasing their talents, players would have a nearly impossible time going pro. the lack of a paying alternative is because no one would pay a dime to see these kids play if they didnt have an osu jersey on their back.

  7. twitter:Chapman_Jamie says: Jun 27, 2011 1:13 PM

    As I pay my $800 in student loans bills per month I continue to not feel bad for athletes who didn’t get “paid” to play college sports.

  8. ramofsteel says: Jun 27, 2011 2:24 PM

    Words can’t describe how angry I get whenever I hear the words “college athletes should get paid.” You’re tellin me, somethin that is supposed to be there for entertainment and school unity on weekends should have a salary. Meanwhile, the poor med student tryin to become a surgeon to actually help save human life has to struggle w/ massive loans and debts??

  9. tiz305 says: Jun 27, 2011 2:59 PM

    “All players, regardless of sport or gender, would have that right. Sign things, sell things, appear in commercials, get paid. The market determines who gets how much, and a loose sense of fairness would arise, with the players most responsible for filling the seats and raising the profile of their programs getting the most money.”

    If that is the model, then what would stop Johnny Booster from paying $20,000 for an autographed pair of Player X’s dirty socks?

  10. eaglelover1 says: Jun 27, 2011 3:02 PM

    All of you jealous ass people that say and education is good enough to pay for playing football at a college need to realize that players get hurt. Sometimes to the point of being in wheelchairs for the rest of their lives. A scholarship prohibits you from getting a job.

    And lastly…………………………….

    SCHOOLS MAKE MONEY OFF THE TALENTS OF THESE YOUNG MEN.

  11. jamie54 says: Jun 27, 2011 3:13 PM

    Market will dictate how much each article of clothing will bring in but remember, that’s earned income Uncle Sam gets a cut of. If the businessman pays $3000 for a jersey and describes it as part of advertising, business expense, then the kid needs to report that. Wink, wink, that’ll never happen as they’ll report they paid $50 so it’s clean. Another layer of enterprise would crop up such as an ebay clearinghouse where the items are reported legitemately and the Government can track it. Legalize it, sure, if you want, but there’s consequences.

  12. vbe2 says: Jun 27, 2011 3:37 PM

    Why is the gear the students to sell? Shouldn’t that all belong to the college? Shouldn’t the student that sells school property be arrested for stealing school property and the buyer arrested for receiving stolen property?

  13. tfbuckfutter says: Jun 27, 2011 3:51 PM

    I find this very hard to believe.

    Channing Crowder went to college?

  14. richc111 says: Jun 27, 2011 4:32 PM

    I agree with the comment that these are not his shirts to sell. They were supplied by the school. I went to school for chemistry. Does that mean I can sell the school’s lab equipment to set up a meth lab? I am not in favor of paying these athletes. If higher educations benefits from sports so be it. Use that money to fund their music programs. Nothing wrong with that. What if you did start paying them, how far does it go? Grade school? The big problem is what is more important sports in college or an education. In some school I am sure that is up to debate.

  15. granadafan says: Jun 27, 2011 4:33 PM

    You know why this act should remain illegal? Because certain schools (namely SEC) would use it as an indirect way to pay athletes. They’d give them extra gear and direct them to the wealthiest boosters who would “pay” hundreds of thousands for a jersey, a gym bag, or an extra ring. That is a complete unfair advantage to the other schools who play by the rules.

    I can just see this scenario: “Hello five star Recruit X, if you come to our school, Mr Booster will give $200K for the recruiting hat we’re giving you. It’s all LEGAL!”.

  16. ftwatty says: Jun 27, 2011 4:36 PM

    There’s no way they can possibly allow them to sell their stuff within a workable framework. Have a good game? Booster buys your sweat band for $5000. Throw 3 picks? No money for you.

    The recruiting implications would be ginormous, with big money schools paying top dollar for “memorabilia”, while the Northwesterns and TCU’s of the world aren’t able to keep keep up. Why would any good player ever go to a school that didn’t have the booster support to pay him more for his shwag?

    Is it “fair”? Probably not. But a free market approach isn’t fair either.

  17. mogogo1 says: Jun 27, 2011 4:55 PM

    @vbe2 Some of the gear might belong to the college, so I’m with you there. But in the OSU case some of the items sold were items presented to players as rewards, including game balls and bowl rings. It’s hard to see how those are anything other than the players’ personnel property. Where does the NCAA come off having any say what the players do with their own stuff?

    And while the players are banned from doing things every other student can do, including selling their own property, holding jobs while going to school, etc., the NCAA and the schools shamelessly use the players to earn money for themselves. It takes a lot of moxie to market video games with players’ likenesses and give them absolutely nothing, but that’s how the NCAA rolls. I still find it bizarre that for all the abuses they’re looking into at Ohio State, the compliance officer being given a car is perfectly fine with the NCAA.

  18. tfbuckfutter says: Jun 27, 2011 6:44 PM

    In this whole debate, people seem to be forgetting about one (huge) group of student athletes.

    The ones who DON’T become NFL players and (presumably) actually GRADUATE and USE THEIR EDUCATION AND DEGREE TO GENERATE INCOME.

    The education THEY DIDN’T HAVE TO PAY FOR THROUGH PART TIME JOBS, SAVINGS, OR FINANCING.

    So, mediocre players get a free education and become professionals able to (hopefully) support themselves for life…..and great players get exposure and end up making craploads of money.

    What either group does or doesn’t do with their opportunities isn’t relevant. But let’s also not forget the middling players who make the NFL and still pull in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year albeit for a short period of time. But again, whether they squander that or save it is inconsequential to the debate.

  19. tfbuckfutter says: Jun 27, 2011 6:46 PM

    mogogo1 says: Jun 27, 2011 4:55 PM
    @vbe2 Some of the gear might belong to the college, so I’m with you there. But in the OSU case some of the items sold were items presented to players as rewards, including game balls and bowl rings. It’s hard to see how those are anything other than the players’ personnel property. Where does the NCAA come off having any say what the players do with their own stuff?

    —————————————–

    The NCAA has the right to do that for the same reason they can bar student athletes from selling their autograph.

    They are making money off the sport and their position in it, thus they are no longer “amateurs”.

    Would the players have that property were it not for the program?

  20. donttouchthedirtypenny says: Jun 27, 2011 8:07 PM

    Does Channing Crowder know what “hypothetically” means? I think in his admission that he sold stuff he actually said he really didn’t sell stuff…

  21. mogogo1 says: Jun 27, 2011 11:51 PM

    tfbuckfutter says:
    Jun 27, 2011 6:46 PM

    The NCAA has the right to do that for the same reason they can bar student athletes from selling their autograph.

    They are making money off the sport and their position in it, thus they are no longer “amateurs”.

    Would the players have that property were it not for the program?
    ________________

    I’m all for treating them as amateurs…but in that case the NCAA needs to stop directly making money off the individual kids. You honestly have no beef with the NCAA making millions off putting likenesses of kids in video games and giving them absolutely nothing?

    There’s a case in court against the NCAA by one of the O’Bannon brothers of UCLA fame who now sells cars for a living. Well, one day somebody came in and told him they’d just played him in a video game. He’d been out of school for a decade and they’re STILL making money off him without giving him a share. How many times over do they have to make back what his scholarship cost before that becomes unethical?

  22. vicks30 says: Apr 19, 2012 6:48 PM

    Art students, music students, theatre students etc. are allowed to sell their artwork, sell an album, star on Broadway and be paid for those talents. Why can’t an athlete be allowed to sell autographs and items?The rules are ALWAYS different for athletes than for everyone else.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!