I regularly rail against the NCAA and their exploitation of athletes, er pardon me, student-athletes, for financial gain but today I move up the chain to the NFL which has a rule preventing a fellow named Leonard Fournette from getting a job.

It works like this. The National Football League refuses to allow any player who has used less than three years of college football eligibility to enter the NFL draft or join a team. Technically Fournette could simply play one game of college football, sit out the remainder of that year, two more years, and then be drafted. Many people are urging him to simply sit out the remainder of his college eligibility and then get drafted. It is fairly certain he would be one of the top picks in the draft which comes with it a salary of approximately $15 million over four years.

If he continues to play he doesn’t increase his potential salary, as he is already at the apex, but he does risk reducing the compensation either through poor play or catastrophic injury.

Every other student in the college, including those on various scholarships, can leave at any time for a professional career. There are no restrictions on any of them. None.

There are any number of reasons for the rule as it exists. The NCAA makes huge amounts of money on the athletes, er pardon me, student-athletes and serves as a free farm system for the NFL. The current rule ensures the NCAA that its best players must stay and perform for the price of an education that is a fraction of the salary Fournette would get if he left.

There are also many arguments as to why the rule is “good for the student-athletes”. One reasonable argument suggests that they might be tempted to leave school before they are ready for the NFL and thus not get the financial remuneration they expected. Another argument suggests that they are being “paid” for their services via the scholarship. I’m sure other people can come up with more arguments but I find them all lacking.

The bottom line is simple for this Libertarian. Fournette has a talent. He should be able to sell that to anyone who wants to bid on it at any time. He should be able to leave school today and join an NFL team that wants to pay him. Any restrictions to his freedom is a restriction to my freedom.

I’ll take it even further. I find the entire draft system as used by sports teams to be repugnant. Restricting a person to negotiating with one company because they “drafted” you? Ridiculous.

Further yet? Sure. The rookie compensation formula is clearly illegal. It removes the ability of the player to negotiate fair compensation for their services. The player is simply “slotted” into a particular salary based upon where they were drafted.

There are reasons for the draft and the slotting system. There are reasons for the NFL to restrict players from leaving the NCAA. I hear all those reasons. I acknowledge them. I understand they are helpful in many ways. Without them organizing a professional sports league is difficult. Yet, they are wrong. They should all be abolished. Free market, fair compensation.

Any legal and mentally competent adult, athlete or no, should be able to pursue the career of their choice at the time of their choice.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition
Next Release: The Gray Horn

I’m sure a great number of people are not aware that something called Competitive Gaming, or eSports, is becoming a major sporting industry.

In a recent interview an ESPN commentator named Colin Cowherd said some fairly nasty things about people who participate in eSports, and by association those who watch them.

The rise of eSports can be seen on outlets like Twitch and competitive events have prize pools in the tens of millions of dollars. The sport is played on a highly competitive level by incredibly skilled eAthletes.

What I want to talk about today is not necessarily eSports or Cowherd but simply the idea that people who share an interest can get together and enjoy what they love at a level unprecedented in human history. Because people can thus freely associate the ability to monetize their interest through capitalism becomes a reality. This is important.

Why is this so important?

The phenomenon of people of like interests freely associating across all geopolitical boundaries signals the first stages of the end of the nation state. I’m a Libertarian and I have friends who are anarchists although I’m not one myself. We share many ideas and one of them is that people should be able to associate based on their interests, not on the happenstance of their geographic and political positions.

Until recently humans were only able to associate with those in close proximity to their geographic location. With the advent of faster methods of travel people were able to travel further to associate freely although the limits of political borders placed a heavy restraint upon that travel. With the creation of the internet those borders are quickly vanishing.

I love chess and I play games almost every day with people from places like Russia, Iran, Iraq, Latvia, Armenia, Texas, England, and many more. They likely have all sorts of opposed political ideologies. They almost certainly disagree about quite a number of things but they love chess. They gather at various websites to freely associate with others who love the game. Their desire to come together has spawned websites that make money from their association either by advertisements or by membership dues. The chess players willingly pay a price in order to be able to gather with those who enjoy the same thing.

I want you to imagine a world where you can associate with people who enjoy the same things as you. That you are not bound by a nation that herds you into a pen. You are not bound by political ideology and kept from those who love what you love. What would such a world look like?

Would people with political differences be less likely to engage in war with those they associate with on other levels? I think so.

Would the nation state be able to demonize other nations when the citizens of their nation freely associate with those across the border? I don’t think so, not as easily at least.

Can the nation state withstand the onslaught of free association regardless of borders or ideology? I think, I hope, no.

When people are free to do what they love regardless of borders why would they care about arbitrary lines drawn on a map? There are no borders on the internet, would that the world would soon follow. As travel becomes easier and faster we gain the ability to go where we want, when we want, with whom we want.

The end of the nation state? A pipe dream or a fast approaching reality. You tell me.

Oh, and, Colin Cowherd, you’re an idiot. If you don’t like something then don’t do it. Lots of people don’t like football but don’t feel the need to insult you because you do. Take note.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition
Next Release: The Gray Horn

I’m a Rams fan and last Sunday we played yet another fantastically entertaining game with the Seattle Seahawks. The Seahawks seem to bring out the best in the Rams and I can only hope they treat every game hereafter as if it’s the Seahawks.

My post today is about comments made by Marshawn Lynch’s mother about the last play in the game. She was upset with the final call in which her son was asked to gain a yard on fourth down into the heart of the Rams defense. She suspects it was called because in a similar, although far more important, situation in the Super Bowl, Marshawn was not asked to run but a pass play was used with disastrous results.

I do not begrudge Mrs. Lynch the right to criticize any decision made on the field by a coach or player. I’ve done plenty of that on my own in the past. It’s part and parcel of being a sports fan to second guess on-field decisions. That being said I think her criticism analogous to an ideology that is hurting the United States these days.

It seems to me that people eagerly look for a scapegoat rather than trying to find real solutions. In this case Mrs. Lynch blames the offensive coordinator of the Seahawks for the issues.

It’s my opinion that in both cases she cites, there really isn’t a scapegoat but instead a hero. In the Super Bowl Malcom Butler made an exceptionally good play and stopped what would likely have been a touchdown most of the time. In the Rams game Michael Brockers drove the offensive lineman into the backfield forcing Lynch to adjust his path and allowing Aaron Donald to stop Lynch short of the first down. Again, in my opinion, the play call was quite reasonable and would have resulted in success a fairly high percentage of the time.

I find Mrs. Lynch’s search for a scapegoat to be a microcosm of attitudes in the United States. There is a much higher emphasis on finding someone to be at fault rather than admitting that some things are quite difficult. Forces arise that thwart even the best laid plans. It largely seems as if finding blame is much more important than finding solutions.

If we are nation that spends its energies trying to find blame rather than solution; a nation that elects politicians who are successful at blaming someone else without offering realistic solutions, what is our future?

If we instantly want to punish the perceived wrongdoer rather than find a way to prevent the wrong are we not doomed to endless wrongs?

I find the self-righteousness of what appears to me to be the average citizen of the United States nauseating. As if we are not humans who make mistakes. Just because you make a plan doesn’t mean it will work. I’ve failed. I’ve miscalculated. I’ve simply been defeated by the better person. It happens.

Do I think my shortcomings will suddenly be solved if I punish someone else? No. I try to do better next time. I learn from the mistake. I accept that someone else just beat me. The end result of that is that I become a better, stronger person. Would that we could become a better, stronger nation. Right now I see us becoming weaker and worse.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition
Next Release: The Gray Horn