The “contradiction at the heart of big-time college football,” as Michael Oriard describes it, is the competing demands of marketing and education. The 1890s proved to university administrators that there was an enormous market for collegiate football, which postulated opportunities for university building. Since this ubiquitous realization, there has coincided this blatant, yet unchanging contradiction that academic institutions are permitted to profit off of the services provided by its student-athletes while the athletes must idly accept that they are amateurs, donating their efforts to their respective schools. The schools then direct this revenue toward strengthening their athletic departments, and thus continues this seemingly endless growth of big-time college sports, all while athletes remain uncompensated and academics continue to take a backseat. The term “extracurricular activity” is defined as follows; “unpaid activities not pertaining to ordinary school classes” (Won). The adjective “commercial” is defined as “viewed with regard to profit” (Merriam-Webster). It is absurd to think that college football can be both a commercial spectacle and an extracurricular activity. “Extracurricular” implies that education comes before sports, however this idea is misconceived. After World War II, the College of William and Mary wanted to elevate its football program to national recognition, so the school altered transcripts of incoming high school students making
In his article “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch (2011) describes how universities are focused on advancing and receiving money from major athletics and having star athletes, but how the universities are not caring for the “student athlete.” The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has made college sports into an unmerited business. However, as years progress more athletes are getting smart and are taking the NCAA to court. The more students that challenges the rules by the NCAA and take them to court, the secrets and undermining values of the NCAA come out and the closer the NCAA comes to an end.
Collegiate athletics have long played an integral role in higher education in the United States. The popularity of collegiate football in America is unprecedented. “The fan frenzy surrounding teams, games, and the sport itself, is borderline barmy. Aptly described as the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat, fan emotions in college football are rampant” (Moore, B., 2010). Football programs are able to generate a great deal of revenue through gate receipts (Groza, M. D., 2010). Football game day attendance is also an excellent proxy for other revenues such apparel sales and concessions.
College athletic programs are among the most popular sporting events in America. With this rise in popularity, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its colleges have also seen a rise in revenue in recent years. In 2014, the NCAA made over 900 million dollars in revenue. Some collegiate coaches, such as Kentucky’s John Calipari, have yearly salaries in the millions, not counting incentives and endorsement deals. While, clearly, money is being made, NCAA regulations ban collegiate athletes from being paid. Many question this rule and argue that athletes at the college level earn and deserve pay for play. The debate to pay or not to pay college athletes rages on despite the latest court ruling supporting NCAA policies. Because colleges and universities earn such a profit from sporting events, many fans feel it is only fair to distribute some of the wealth to the players. Supporters of paying student athletes feel that these young men and women should be fairly compensated for the time demanded of the athletes and the stress put on the athletes, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially. Those in favor of paying college athletes contend that athletic and academic work ethic at both high school and collegiate levels will improve, as well as, fiscal responsibility in these young adults. The NCAA argues that paying athletes would negatively affect their
In the essay “The Shame of College Sports,” Taylor Branch examines the flaws of the National Collegiate Athletic Association in college sports regarding “amateurism” (Branch 227) and the “student-athlete” (227). In doing so, Branch discusses the history of college sports and the National Collegiate Athletic Association while emphasizing certain regulations such as allowing multinational organizations to advertise their brand on athletic gear but athletes cannot use any of their memorabilia to get cash or a free tattoo at a tattoo parlor (227). Branch also argues that athletes are being manipulated for their skills and fame from the National Collegiate Athletic Association and universities and further irritates that they make money off the “unpaid
With the universities pulling in more than twelve billion dollars, the rate of growth for college athletics surpasses companies like McDonalds and Chevron (Finkel, 2013). The athletes claim they are making all the money, but do not see a dime of this revenue. The age-old notion that the collegiate athletes are amateurs and students, binds them into not being paid by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). This pay for play discussion has been talked about since the early 1900s but recently large steps are being made to actually make a change. There are many perspectives on the payment of collegiate student athletes coming from the NCAA, the athletes themselves, and the university officials.
“College Athletes for Hire, The Evolution and Legacy of the NCAA’s Amateur Myth” written by Allen L. Sack and Ellen J. Staurowsky. In their book, the authors enlighten the reader on such issues as athletic scholarships, professionalism in college sports, and favoritism for athletes as well as many more important legal, and ethical issues that we as a country need to address. In this paper I will not do a standard book report by simply regurgitating the information I read in their book.
The ugly truth behind the money machine that is college sports is that, every year, college athletes are deceived by the institutions the compete for into making them millions of dollars, with relatively little in return. Athletes are said to be given a chance to attend college and to attain a free college degree. However, research has shown that this is not completely true for two reasons. For one, the student athlete will spend most of their time in preparation for competition. Secondly, what education the student athlete does receive hardly serves them outside of maintaining eligibility just so
Colleges bring an incredible amount of money by their sport teams alones. According to John Brill, a sports journalist writer, “College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly.” The money made from these sporting events are not being used correctly which is frustrating many college athletes. The money that is being
In today’s society, there are many issues, dilemmas, and scandals that we have to face. After reading Kenneth Jost’s article about college football there is, respectively, many issues in this field. I firmly agree that the Committee of the Coalition of Intercollegiate Athletics, which is an organization that represent roughly half the FBS schools, should search for ways to force college athletes to be admitted into the school before being provided with scholarships to play. Even though everyone loves watching college athletics, the purpose of going to school isn’t to be entertained, it’s an opportunity to better your education. Although many colleges feel like this will decrease their schools win efficiency there are examples that diminish
The popularity of college sports and its value to entertainment is skyrocketing. The NCAA is the head organization in control of a hundred billion dollar industry. The disgusting disparity arrives at the difference between what
What college teams are not anymore, are sports teams that represents their schools. As stated by Dan Wetzel “they are profit points that command their own cable television networks, massive stadiums, huge media rights, national tournaments and billions and billions in revenue” (Wetzel, 2014). As identified previously, both basketball and football are referred to when discussing college sports that generate the large revenue. The transformation of what college sports has become cannot be more evident, especially during March Madness for the NCAA. With these factors in mind, Division I football and men’s basketball players do not merely play a sport of leisure. According to Edelman, “rather, they are core members of their university’s marketing team, as well as the labor force behind a lucrative
College sports support a multi-billion dollar industry in the United States, yet the principals whose performance on the field or in packed stadiums across the country are strictly amateurs who are forbidden to accept monetary compensation for their contributions, at least technically. Perhaps no better example exists of the tremendous importance of major college sports programs than the current controversy that recently came to light involving the legendary Pennsylvania State University Football program in connection with the apparent long-term tolerance of and refusal to take appropriate action against Jerry Sandusky, the defensive coordinator for the legendary coach Joe Paterno. Had the same types of allegations been levied against a member of the university's academic faculty, the institution surely would have taken appropriate action immediately. Meanwhile, in many respects, college athletes at large institutions competing at the highest levels routinely receive compensation in various forms that are impermissible, far beyond the already valuable full scholarships and room and board to which they are entitled in return for their matriculating at their institutions. That reality has prompted some to suggest that college athletes should be paid for their services. While that approach might resolve the obvious hypocrisy inherent in the system as well as the fiction behind the proverbial "student athlete," paying
Since the inception of high profile intercollegiate athletics, there has been a debate regarding the place of athletics within the structure of higher education. Within the last few decades, this debate has intensified as intercollegiate athletics has transformed into a multi-billion dollar industry that shifted the way athletic departments operate. College athletic departments have been able to generate millions of dollars in revenue through corporate partnerships, television contracts, alumni and donor support, and ticket sales (Toma, 2003). Specifically, this athletic revenue is primarily generated by football and basketball programs. College athletics has entered the “show business phase as football and basketball have evolved into commercial entertainment products (Duderstadt, p.69).” As the commercialization of collegiate athletics continue grow, the concept of student-athlete amateurism has become increasingly strained as there has been a push for providing student-athletes, specifically in football and basketball, additional compensation for their play.
There has been amplified debate on the treatment, education, training of the college athlete. To avoid exploitation of athletes, “The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), formed in 1905, set bylaws requiring college student-athletes to be amateurs in order to be eligible for intercollegiate athletics competition” (Schneider n.p.). Intercollegiate athletics have dramatically changed over the last several decades. Currently, intercollegiate athletics generate tremendous amounts of revenue, remarkably in football and basketball. College sports in America is a
The only significant money-makers are men’s basketball and men’s football the rest either don’t make any money, others make a little, or end up losing money (Hartnett, 2013). Least popular sports like soccer, tennis, or volleyball don’t earn the university money, the revenue sports have to make up for the lost difference (Zimbalist, 2001). While college football may appear to generate giant revenues, some of this money must be allocated to keep these non-revenue sports afloat. Other arguments suggest that not all college sports make enough money but evidentially, universities spend a significant amount of their revenue on nonessentials including construction of sports facilities. This has been deemed as an “arms race” where universities are spending significant amounts of money on infrastructure (Prewett, 2014). The University of Cincinnati, for example, is going to spend more than $80 million expanding its football stadium by 2015 (Peale, 2013).