I call them Knight moves.
I do so because the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics seemingly meets under the cover of darkness. Most of the information it gleans never sees the light of day, and reports published by the commission put most people to sleep.
This past week, however, I was chugging energy drinks when I ran across the latest report from the panel. And who knew? There was actually some interesting stances taken by the panel.
In case you're unaware, the Knight Commission helps NCAA presidents by providing information that helps with decision making.
In the past, it has uniformly opposed paying college athletes.
Apparently, though, that's not the case anymore. Which is a shocker.
Could the NCAA open its collective mind? Really?
I'm not convinced, and I'm sure you're not either. But a dude named Gabe Feldman, director of Tulane's Sports Law Program, argued in Washington this week that rule changes might be OK to allow players to profit off their own name, image and likeness.
Understand, wishy-washiness remains. The commission issued a statement that it "did not endorse any specific proposal" but that "the time has come for NCAA leadership to develop oversight, legal and financial reform."
Feldman produced a 17-page "white paper" on the proposal. But since we are a "newspaper," I'll boil it down.
If you're, say, WVU quarterback Skyler Howard, you could, under this proposal, benefit from your athletic ability and popularity by doing a commercial for, say, Boat Motors.
"Big Sky" could endorse products, make personal appearances or, heck, be on made-for-TV movies. But what the hiring company could not use is "game-related" material. In other words, Boat Motors couldn't use video of Howard heaving a pass to Shelton Gibson with the flying "WV" front and center.
School marks or logos and, especially, NCAA logos would be verboten. (Unless, that is, a really big contract involves all three parties.)
All would have to be approved beforehand. But what I also found interesting is Oklahoma men's basketball coach Lon Kruger got involved with the project. (What a guy. First, he brought us Buddy Hield. Now Knight Commission info!)
At the National Press Club in Washington, it was revealed Kruger recently spoke to local business owners in Norman.
"I asked them, 'If legal, how many of our athletes would you invest $1,000 in for an hour of their time?" Kruger said, according to "Inside Higher Ed." "We have 600 student-athletes at a time when a lot of good things are happening at the University of Oklahoma. We have a lot of very recognizable athletes in a college town. What would be a good business decision? How many athletes would you invest in? And the answer on the low end was six, and the high end was 10."
Ol' Lon's study, of course, isn't scientific. Also, some other studies have suggested thousands across the country would benefit, while others yet suggest only about 50.
My take? Tap Pandora on the shoulder and tell her to hide that box. What if 20 car dealers in Alabama each paid $1,000 to, say, 10 Crimson Tide players (aka top recruits) to stand behind shiny Buicks, Chevys, Kias, etc., for different commercials? It would cost each dealer $10,000 and give each player a cool $20,000.
Nice, right? About that though: The proposal said money earned from such agreements would be kept in a trust fund until the player graduates. Also, the players could only receive such benefits "if they are in good academic standing."
I can see where an athlete would have to be "in good standing" while shooting, say, a commercial. But any money earned would certainly have to go to the earner eventually, whether he or she graduates or not.
Also, you might remember that my Wednesday column broke down some WVU football coaches' raises. Sometimes, I opined, schools are giving away money to them just to give away money.
Well, the Knight Commission also issued a formal recommendation to tackle just that issue. The panel urged schools to better address athletes' education and health concerns by recommending 100 percent of revenue received via March Madness basketball be restricted to supporting athletes.
The money could be used for concussion prevention. It could be used for hiring more academic counselors. It could not be used for building new stadium beer concessions stands or stuffing the pockets of coaches.
I truly don't know how the endorsement proposal would fly. I foresee football players eventually in sweet rides hitting their local country clubs for a quick nine.
But sending the March Madness money solely to student care should definitely see the light of day.