New Spring Game Trend Is a Disservice to College Football Fans

The spring game was thought to be a dying tradition after several teams across the country elected not to have them last season.

That concern was valid at the time, but what is happening now might be just as problematic in a different way.

That was due to the fear of players being tampered with who played in that game. Last season, there was still a spring transfer portal window that allowed players to transfer out after the spring game. Teams would watch other teams scrimmage and then start to tamper to get them to come to their schools.

So, coaches elected not to have it so they wouldn't have to worry about as many departures. Well, this season there is no longer any spring window and spring games are making their way back... sort of.

Alabama Crimson Tide head coach Kalen DeBoer. | David Leong-Imagn Images

The problem is they are not coming back in the way fans are used to, and that changes the entire purpose of the event.

In the past, not only could you go watch the game live in person, but you could also typically watch your favorite team on television. Either on a streaming service like ESPN+ or one of the major networks like ESPN or Fox. However, several teams elected not to broadcast their spring game this season.

According to Next Round Live, most major programs are scheduled not to have their spring game televised, as programs continue to revamp and rethink their spring practice formats in the transfer portal era. BYU, Colorado, Kentucky, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oregon, Syracuse, Texas A&M and Washington are the only teams scheduled to have spring games on television.

That is a significant shift, and it raises a bigger question about who these events are actually for. This is a major problem because the whole point of the spring game is for the fans. Teams already hold scrimmages on their own throughout the spring with no fans; the spring game is for the fans to get a glimpse of what the team is supposed to look like.

If that access is limited, then the spring game loses its identity and becomes just another controlled practice disguised as a public event.

If you aren't giving fans complete access, both in person and online, there is no point in having a spring game. Instead, have a normal closed door scrimmage like you would normally do anyways. What this is doing is looking more like a money grab, and not actually being something for the fan base.

Programs cannot have it both ways. They cannot market these events as fan experiences while simultaneously restricting access to a large portion of their audience.

Not everyone has the money to travel long distances to just watch a spring game; they would much rather watch it from the comfort of their home. Teams not giving that access is basically cutting off a large portion of the fan base, and it's an overall disservice. Either bring the games back in full force like they once were, or do away with them.

In a sport that thrives on fan passion and engagement, limiting accessibility is a dangerous move, especially when those same fans are being asked to invest more than ever through tickets, subscriptions and NIL support.

It's just another thing in this new era of college athletics for fans to deal with, and it feels more and more like programs and the NCAA are alienating them even more.

If college football is not careful, it risks turning traditions that once built connection into decisions that create distance. And for a sport built on loyalty, that is a dangerous trend.

Add us as a preferred source on Google