Tuberville will smack Saban with his invisible hand.

During the “Red Scare” of the 1940s and 1950s, famous actors and musicians were singled out and accused of secretly spreading communism in America. Were soviets actually sending covert agents to poison our culture with ideals of socialism? Communist party members claimed that some of their espionage efforts worked, but how well do we know their reach? Was it through Hollywood, music, or was it something nobody suspected? At a time when Hollywood and rock n’ roll seemed like rational suspects for communist sympathizers, the popularity of football was quickly spreading across high schools and universities. Football increased ‘collective’ ideals and made people happy to contribute to the team instead of the individual – much more than any other sport. Could it be that football was injected into the country’s culture to weaken our support of capitalism? Think about it.

Even though all of this makes perfect sense in my mind, I’m able to recognize I’m an idiot when it comes to sociopolitical issues (I made a ‘B’ in Sociology 1000 at Auburn.). Therefore, the answers to the questions raised above are all ‘NO’. However, there are some ongoing trends in college football that reiterate the fact that communism is bad and capitalism is good.

Have you ever seen someone become absolutely baffled when a football recruit chooses a school based on his self interest rather than the school he grew up cheering for? Some people will actually criticize someone for acting in their best interest rather than tradition!

Football teams succeed when they’re able to benefit the players and universities succeed when they benefit their students. Because university policies tend to reflect tradition and socialistic ideals instead of the current market, universities unnecessarily harm the futures of student athletes and the university as a whole.

It is no secret that many college football players don’t care about academics - they just want to play football. So, why not let them major in ‘Football’? You might say that a degree in Football’ would be worthless since very few college football players become professional football players. You’d be right. However, why do universities offer Philosophy as a major when so few students become philosophers? Why do universities offer ‘17th Century Art’ as a major when so few students become 17th century artists? Why offer ‘General Studies’ as a major when so few graduates become generals?

People choose majors based on personal interests and the demand of the market. It would not have been a good idea for me to major in electrical engineering in the 1400s, mostly because there was no demand for electrical engineers at that point in time. Similarly, years from now, when Al Gore devises a method of sending power to appliances with happy thoughts, my major will be obsolete. In 2007, there’s a market for my degree and there’s an interest - that’s why colleges offer the major. There also exists a market in today’s society for football players.

Football majors would still take core classes, but they’d also take classes in football history, football strategies, how to hire agents, how to stay healthy, marketing, things they would use if they became a professional football player. Department funding wouldn’t be a problem, it’d come from the athletic department which is funded by the free market – unlike most other majors which require funding from the government. If those majoring in Football were unable to become football players after college, they would still be able to compete for jobs. There aren’t many wanted ads placed for philosophy and women studies majors, but they still get jobs. They become teachers, writers, entrepreneurs, all sorts of things. Those who major in Football would be able to compete for the same jobs with far better qualifications than if they graduated in a field they had no interest in. Remember, this is just giving the student more choices. They’re still free, and encouraged to, major in more challenging subjects. This way, they’re just given more options.

Students would no longer complain about professors holding athletes to lower standards in the classroom. Professors would no longer complain about having to teach football players who are not interested in the subject matter. Football players would be happy because they’re learning about things they want to learn about. Isn’t that the point of college in the first place?

E-mail Mark at mark@theauburner.com

Oh, and speaking of capitalism....here's a link to our sponsor (Auburn football tickets).