Incentivize College Football Bowl Participation by Paying Players

Bowl opt-outs are a letdown. Jaylon Smith’s leg was injured during the 2016 Fiesta Bowl. A projected top-five pick fell to the second round. Many star players have opted out to not play in games rewarding schools, sponsors, and betters, but not them.

Kirby Smart can complain all he wants, but players participating in non-playoff postseason games is not necessary.

Only games leading to a national championship are meaningful.

The executive director of Bowl Season, Nick Carparelli, has proposed that players should get a cut of the money that the bowls generate. This idea is common sense.

“The notion that players should be compensated for participating in a bowl game at the end of the season is a very real discussion that needs to be had,” Carparelli said to Yahoo Sports’ Ross Dellenger. ESPN and ABC cleared out their sports calendar for bowl season. Money is pouring in from the bowl games. Yet, without a payout, or anything meaningful to compete for, advising potential April NFL draft picks to not play these games is logical.

Players should be salaried by the school, then they would be obligated to play in the games. College sports can’t cash in on its players without offering them compensation for their efforts.

Jaylon Smith was lucky to be drafted by the Dallas Cowboys but if injured and unable to play in the NFL, he may have only received $800,000 from his insurance policy. Is it worth playing in a non-playoff Fiesta Bowl game?