Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Big Ten Wednesday mailbag
By Josh Moyer
Big Ten mailbags are like money -- you can never have enough. So Adam and Brian have handed the reins over to me today to answer your questions.
This is my first Big Ten mailbag, but don't go easy on me. Let's get this started.
Josh Moyer: Good question, Jackie. It's a bit of a complicated issue, so let's kind of take it step by step here. First of all, there are two types of insurances built around players who are normally projected to go within the first three rounds: Loss-of-value insurance in case an injury -- maybe a torn ACL, for example -- causes a player to drop in the NFL draft, and then there's insurance that only covers a player in case he suffers a career-ending injury. Both insurances have really become common, and the NCAA's actually allowed this for about 25 years. The NCAA will even extend loans to players who want the insurance -- it's part of the Exceptional Student-Athlete Disability Insurance Program, which helps out about 60 to 80 football players a year -- but, of course, there's a catch. The NCAA will only grant loans to players who want the career-ending insurance. Want the loss-of-value policy? Too bad. You'll have to get that yourself, and that'll cost five-figures.
Melvin Gordon wanted both policies, and they cost about $28,000, according to this article by Wisconsin State Journal's Tom Oates. That kind of money might be easy to come by for Johnny Football's family -- but not for most others. So Wisconsin paid for the policies out of the Student Opportunity Fund, and I applaud the move. I spoke to Wisconsin SID Brian Lucas this afternoon, and he acknowledged it's pretty rare for a university to pay for the insurance. (It is a first for Wisconsin, although Texas A&M has also done it.) But it's obviously within the rules. If anything, I think the NCAA should start offering and extending loans to cover both insurances. I can't see a good reason why it's not already doing that.
As for Gordon, maybe some critics might say this was an incentive for him to stay at Wisconsin another year -- even if Gordon disagrees with that assertion. Quite frankly, I don't care either way. With all the issues in the NCAA, there are worse problems than giving talented players an incentive to stay in school and finish their degrees.
Josh Moyer: Oh, come on. What kind of question is that? Of course, with that monstrous strength, it would be Brandon Scherff -- but I'll say he wins in a split decision. All joking aside, though, I spoke to both Iowa players Tuesday at Big Ten media days, and I posed a question about who'd win in a one-on-one battle -- but on the gridiron, not in the boxing ring. Since Scherff's on the outside at offensive tackle and Carl Davis is inside at defensive tackle, they haven't gone at it since they were freshmen. But Davis dug into the hypothetical. Here's what he told me: "I'd definitely give it to Scherff as a player right now. He's a great player. The stuff he does, he's really matured as a player in his development. He's strong as a house. ... He's the better player."
So, quite frankly, if Scherff is a good enough pick for Davis, then it's good enough for me.
Brian from Altoona, Pennsylvania, writes: Penn State's pick for a new AD doesn't make any sense. Why would they go after her with her academic record? Am I missing something or is Penn State crazy?
Josh Moyer: There's no doubt about it -- picking former Cal AD Sandy Barbour was definitely a bit of a head-scratcher. Northwestern's Jim Phillips would've been the slam-dunk hire if PSU could've pried him away, while Barbour's kind of the unexpected consolation prize. She ended her career as Cal AD at a low point after the football team finished with the worst graduation rate (44 percent) among the nation's 72 major programs. Cal! As in Cal-Berkeley! It's a great school, so those numbers were not acceptable.
Penn State president Eric Barron blamed those numbers on Cal's budget crisis. And he's not necessarily wrong, as that definitely contributed to it all. But Barbour waited too long to address the issue. On the positive side, Penn State should be an "easier" school to oversee since fundraising should be a little easier between the football team's past tradition and success. And, keep in mind, most people didn't like the Bill O'Brien hire, either, when it was first announced.
All that being said, if I were in Barbour's position, I think it'd be smart if her first act as AD was to invest money into something academic-related -- whether it's a new studying lounge, more tutors, whatever. Academics are her biggest criticism right now, and she could help shift the conversation with a move that benefits education. Plus, even if the move might put PSU in the red a bit, how many people have actually ever said, "Gee, I wish we didn't invest as much in academics."? Seems like a win-win move to me. She starts Aug. 18 -- so we'll see how it goes.