The argument about whether college athletes should
be paid is once again raging. Twitter feeds across the country have been
bombarded by ESPN basketball commentator Jay Bilas arguing that the only people
not being cut in on the profits of the NCAA are the athletes earning the money.
Bilas exposed the NCAA’s most noticeable flaw in their online store, which
paired athletes’ names to their school’s jersey with their number. This is an
example of using a student’s image for profit that was long argued to occur in
NCAA football games. While I agree with Bilas on the hypocrisy of the
NCAA, I am going to take a different look at the problem.
I have as
many problems with the NCAA as anyone else, but it seems like the compensation
for a scholarship athlete is becoming increasingly reasonable when most
students walk out of school with tens of thousands of dollars of student loans
(I am up to about $20,000 myself). The simple fact is that a college
scholarship to a high priced school can run $250,000 these days. Is it pro
money? No, but they are not supposed to be pro athletes. It would be hard to
tell the way the NCAA has treated them like commodities, but the money for
postseason tournaments, international trips, travel, scholarships, and
such do not grow on trees.
I also know that in revenue sports (football
and basketball), more than half the team is given a significant, if not full
ride, scholarship to the university. At the University of Texas for example,
the average total cost of attendance will run a student about $45,790 this
year. So for a five year, fully funded college education, an athletic
scholarship is worth $228,950. This is more than the majority of minor league
baseball players, NBA D-League players, Arena League football players and AHL
players make, all of whom were the either the best player or a starter
at their college. Include travel expenses, the exclusive tutoring during
road trips and athletics-based opportunities offered to students and that
college expense is much higher.
Is the current NCAA system perfect? Absolutely not,
but it is not completely broke either. While many will argue for payment of
athletes, I would argue that the athletes are already being paid very well. And
if these athletes do not think so, well then they can help pay my student
loans.
Should collegiate athletes be paid for their services? My answer to this question, is yes, athletes should be paid by universities around the country for their athletic services. I don’t have an answer for how much, but I feel like they should get compensated for their hard work and marketability. Athletes bring in enormous amounts of profitability and revenue for their respective schools through many channels. Athletic departments make so much revenue off player jersey sales, admission tickets, student tuition costs, and etc. For instance, according to USA today the University of Texas athletic department reported a $163.3 million in revenue for the 2011-12 season. This has a lot to do with their student athletes creating success and making the athletic department, sport teams, and university look good to outsiders (fans). Fans are loyal to their university’s sport team and will pay anything to watch the players play and obtain their official gear and clothing line.
ReplyDeletehttp://sports.yahoo.com/news/texas-athletic-department-reports-163-172121076--ncaaf.html
I couldn't agree more with the ideas and facts that you use to back up your opinions. I think from a first hand look it is easy for people to jump to conclusions and say that college athletes should be paid. However when you look at the logistics of a college athlete and a lot of the benefits that come with being an athlete, there is no easy or logical way to pay athletes that wouldn't destroy the amateur status of collegiate athletes. I hear a lot of people talk about how athletes don't have the money to take a girlfriend out on a date or go hangout with their friends. I remember very clearly during my undergrad days of school that I didn't have the money to take my girlfriend (now my wife) out to eat and I am still covered with school loans. I would have loved a scholarship to play a sport.
ReplyDeleteI believe athletes should be paid. If you gave each athlete some kind of dollar amount a month depending on the school and sport I don’t think that will hurt. The bigger the school is the more money you get from financial aid to cover you, so it should be the same for getting paid. The average athlete scholarship is 50,000 a year. They are going to bring in over millions of dollars by playing the game and everything else that goes with the program. The bigger schools have more money to give out, and why not give that money that the school makes back to the athletes, or at least some of it. There is a logical and format able way they could come up with a way to pay players. They just have to sit down and figure it out.
ReplyDeleteThere is an ongoing discussion about whether or not student-athletes should be paid and in my opinion they should be paid to play. I know many individuals think that if the student-athlete is getting a full scholarship than he or she is already getting paid to play, but I disagree.
ReplyDeleteIf you think about it, when a student-athlete gets a full scholarship, the school is paid not the athlete individually. In my opinion, the school is getting double the money because the state pays for the school and then the school gets more income. When a fan comes to a game each person has to pay and on top of that the fans spend their money at the concession stands and pro shops. All that money goes to the school, not the players. I have heard people say that players are given lots of athletic apparel and ‘gear’; however, that is not completely true because once the student- athlete’s career is over the student-athlete must return most of the gear. In reality the student-athlete is really they are just renting it.
According to ESPN, the NCAA and CBS/Turner Sports made a deal for $10.8 billion for March Madness in the years between 2011 and 2024. Most of the big schools have television deals with major networks; I think some of this money should be distributed amongst the players.
After reading the Los Angeles Times article, The O'Bannon case: When, if ever, should college athletes get paid?, I question the partnership between the NCAA and the video game industry. I believe that the student-athlete should be paid as the NCAA and video companies are making money off these collegiate players. Why not pay the players because it seems to me that a lot of other individuals are making money off them.
Thanks for sharing this kind of information with us.
ReplyDeleteStudent Athletes