Fair Compensation For Student Athletes

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.

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.

In the United States, college athletics are growing larger by the minute. College athletics contribute not only to the recognition of colleges and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), it also contributes to the income of colleges and the NCAA. Without student athletes, these colleges and the NCAA would not reap the benefits of college athletics, such as: increased awareness of colleges, higher application rates, and of course the revenue brought in from game and event tickets, apparel, and contracts for licensing and television rights. Since the student athletes, who devote a great deal of time to their sport, are the cog in the machine that is the NCAA and college athletics, they deserve the fair and rightful compensation that they certainly do not currently receive. Here is exactly why student athletes in the NCAA should be compensated for what they do for their colleges, on and off the field of play.

Since the 1950’s the NCAA has promoted an idea that student athletes that are given a full scholarships are receiving a free ride for their education. In this article Ramogi Huma, and Ellen Staurowsky highlight controversial issues about how college athletics are run. In the article it is noted that 45% of football, and 52% of basketball players do not graduate. The two programs that revenue the most money for an athletic program are Men’s Football, and Men’s Basketball. The article debates that the NCAA uses the money that athletes in men’s football and basketball generate from their play to assist in funding other programs in the athletic department. While athletes are generating millions of dollars for their universities, the athlete spends on average of $3,222 in out of pocket expenses. While attending these universities these athletes live at or under the poverty line. If these athletes were allowed access to the fair market like the professional athletes, the average FBS football and basketball player would be “worth approximately $121,048 and $265,027 respectively (not counting individual commercial endorsement deals)” (Huma). The NCAA maintains that these athletes are amateurs and to keep their eligibility to participate in college athletics they can receive zero compensation for their talent. By maintaining this view point the NCAA allows athletes to only receive grant-in-aid’s which reward the athlete with free tuition, and room and board and can receive no other

Every year the NCAA helps Universities provide more than 2.7 billion dollars in athletic scholarships to more than 150,000 students. Full scholarships cover tuition and fees, room and board, course related books, and a full meal plan. The majority of each scholarship allotted per student is taken care of through the schools income rather than the NCAA themselves. The National College Athletic Association acknowledges twenty four different sports and over 460,000 athletes that compete in the organization. In the 2014 fiscal year the NCAA had a total revenue of over one billion dollars, with nearly eighty point five million in surplus. Since 2008 the NCAA’s total revenue has already doubled and is still on the rise yet the NCAA claims to be a non-profit organization. With all this profit going to the NCAA people fail to recognize where the money is coming from, and not necessarily where the proceeds are going but where they are not. Every athlete that competes in a collegiate sport, whether on scholarship or not help supply the NCAA’s income; every athlete that helps supply the NCAA’s billion dollar industry is not allowed to receive one cent in payment for their service. Although this may seem fair to many, 460,000 hardworking athletes believe different.

Division 1 schools have generated a total of $9.15 billion in revenue during the 2015 fiscal year. (2) That's a lot of money for students to make. College athletes will go straight from highschool to going to another 4 -12 years of college. They are using their adulthood to do more school. Not start a family, or get money for their family. Should the NCAA pay them a small cut of it? If student-athletes make all of this money for the league, they should at least get a piece of what they have made for them. Could we possibly be seeing college players make more money than the average adult? Sometimes players have injuries. Who would pay for that? Would the school or league pay for it?

With another year going by, fans watched another exciting NCAA Basketball Tournament and another football season filled with highlights and heartbreak. Many people think that the NCAA is as popular as professional sports. It’s a fact that it’s annual revenue can challenge this opinion. College football and basketball generate more than the National Basketball Association, a total of more than $6 billion yearly (Nocera, Joe). There is one major difference between the two associations, however. NBA players get paid for the all the money they help bring in, while NCAA athletes receive no compensation. Getting an education for free is not enough anymore; especially if the NCAA wants to act as a money making business, but not reward those who

There has always been a big controversial debate on whether college athletes should receive some type of compensation for playing Division one sports. Many college teams pile up huge revenue from football games, basketball games, and many other different sports. Although the university piles up huge amounts of that money, not one penny goes towards any of the athletes. Even though they’re the reason why universities are getting rich from all the money the sports have obtained, the revenue that usually comes from game tickets, sponsorships, and booster clubs. Also college athletics have gained immense popularity among Americans over the past few decades, more American have turned their heads to watching collegiate sports rather than watching professional sports, to the fact that its way more exciting. This has resulted into increased revenues for the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the other colleges that’s participating with this, in this case the debate of whether college athletes should be compensated beyond their athletic scholarships. Student athletes have worked hard, have dedicated themselves to the sport and also sacrificed their own time for the sport they love.

Recently, the topic of compensating student athletes has become a popular subject of debate within the media. Deciding whether or not to pay student athletes may seem simple at first glance; however, further research into the debate reveals many economic studies that provide persuasive information benefitting one side over the other. Paying student athletes would be more economically efficient and to not allow payment would be considered price fixing, also this would reduce the negative externalities faced by the student athletes in the future. Although paying players would have economic benefits, it would also have high costs to the fans in the form of higher ticket prices and a loss of competition within college sports. Student athletes should

According to Forbes the NCAA currently produces nearly $11 Billion in annual revenue from college sports -- more than the estimated total league revenues of both the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League. As the world of college sports continues to grow, thrive, and expand; it has become clear that there needs to be changes among the rules of the NCAA. The NCAA place themselves in a position to be one of the most successful nonprofits in the world by not fully compensating its students-athletes. Mark Emmert, the president of the NCAA, believes that “they are students, not employees.” If this is true then the student-athletes would not be dedicating so much time to the sport, they would not be missing class for their sporting events, and they would not be used as marketing ploys for the college.

College athletics is a very diverse organization involving a lot of students, mainly as the players, and non-students such as officials, coaches and others. The leading governing body for college athletics is the National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA. College sports is itself a big industry involving sponsorships, TV networks, endorsements, retail products and marketing. But in spite of it being a big business, the players are not compensated for the work they deliver. This opens up two opinions: should players be paid, or should they not? Kristi Dosh’s article, “The Problems With Paying College Athletes”, discusses the various problems with paying college athletes, and the biggest question being where will the money come from. On

I have been following the argument of whether student-athletes should be paid. Currently, many collegiate athletes feel that they are not properly compensated for their efforts and money generated. The NCAA is clinging to the notion of amateurism and what it means to the state and competitiveness of the game. With the ever-increasing money flow and a heightening amount of scandals and lawsuits the NCAA has reached a point where they need to pay the players or exterminate all impurities and reach pure amateurism across the board. I plan to expand on the rights of collegiate athletes and those forfeited when they become a “student athlete”. Then I will look to see whether the loss of rights is justified and whether the term “student-athlete”

I would find it a bit too drastic to resemble the structural hierarchy of the NCAA with slavery.

It is often not talked about how professional athletes struggle after they call it quits on their career due to their lack of knowledge. A lot of players end up bankrupt, poor, or live a mediocre lifestyle after previously making hundreds of thousandths of dollar. They were unable to pursue a job after their career because they had no degree, no source of any intellect because they were only concerned about their athletic ability and decided to leave school after one to two years to pursue a career that could potentially ruin them for the rest of their life. NCAA should look into this matter one day and the committee should come together to establish a new rule that forces collegiate student athletes to graduate and earn their degree so they can have a life after their professional career. This new rule could potentially ensure that retired athletes could have a future after sports and could start protecting themselves from serious injuries at an earlier age. If you look at a few current and newly retired players you can easily tell how well or poor they are going to do in their lives after sports.

Sitting around the dinner table talking about our day, my dad starts off by telling us about how a guy at his work got terminated without being given a legitimate reason. He then goes on to tell us about how he will not be coming home until late the next day because he has a meeting with the terminated employee and people at work, to try and get this man’s job back.