Summary Of The Shame Of College Sports

The NCAA has been around and evolved since the beginning of college sports. This organization is a non-profitable organization, but ironically makes more than millions of profit per year. Branch states “that money comes from a combination of ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise, licensing fees, and other sources—but the great bulk of it comes from television contract”(pg. 228). Meanwhile, the student-athletes do not receive any of this money. This is the start of an unsubstantial business between universities built around amateurism.

It is the NCAA’s policy that no student athlete shall receive any special benefits or compensation in regard to their status as an athlete of a university. This basically means that no player can accept gifts or services with any special benefits from school or athletic personnel, or receive any benefits for outside entrepreneurship for reasons regarding their play. For example, a student athlete cannot sign a jersey with their number on it and exchange it for any type of compensation. However, over the past few years, many scandalous conspiracies of soliciting services to athletes for their commitment and play have surfaced. Due to the NCAA’s stance on this issue many of these violations have left athletics programs with sanctions that in reality are very unnecessary and hardly ever punish those who initially violated the rules. The fact is that the college athletics generates on average 10.5 billion dollars of revenue annually, and the NCAA organization alone, about 720 million annually. Of that 720 million that the NCAA accounts for, only 60 percent of that is returned to the Division I universities whose athletics accounted for almost all of it. The rest is dispersed into other funds such as championship games and the national office services, with a small amount being paid to division II and III schools. However, of that 60 percent paid back to the Division I schools, which amounts to approximately 430 million dollars, the majority is spent by the University on

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

NCAA, short for National Collegiate Athletic Association, is a “non-profit” organization which over watch all the athletic related activities on college level. In the early 20th century, President Roosevelt created NCAA because he wanted to insured college athletes from injuries and even deaths. Despite the original purpose of the NCAA is not about money, it has become one of the most lucrative companies in the USA. According to Taylor Branch, “big-time college sports are fully commercialized. Billions of dollars flow through them each year. The NCAA makes money, and enables universities and corporations to make money, from the unpaid labor of young athletes” (Branch). Besides the tremendous fortune these college athletes made for the NCAA, it is also a vital source for university entertainment, enrollment, and money. Although these athletes generate great fortune and put up great shows for society, they do not receive proper pay back. To balance the current unfair compensation system to the athletes, in addition to free tuition, college athletes should be treated as workers in a business market system and paid depending on their own performance.

“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.

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 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

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

Thesis: College athletes should not get paid due to the financial restrictions of the NCAA, the imbalance of competition, and the fact that these young adults are students.

Since its inception in 1906, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, commonly known as simply the NCAA, has pondered the burning question of whether student-athletes should be compensated for their play. Currently, the NCAA employs an amateurism policy, an eligibility regulation that all potential Division I athletes must abide by to participate in their respective sports. This set of rules prohibits players from receiving any form of compensation, whether that be as a result of participating in a sport, being awarded prize money, or signing with an agent. Athletes are allowed to accept financial aid administered by the university, but this generally small subsidy for education is accompanied with uncertainty, and is the only form of “payment” they are permitted to collect. However, there is sufficient evidence that college athletes should be paid as compensation for the money they make for the NCAA, the negative effects that sports have on the players ' lives, the benefits that the sports bring to the school, and for the potential profits missed on social media because of NCAA regulations.

The corruption expressed throughout the hour long documentary is endless examples of ethos which is the majority used in the documentary. Corruption in the NCAA is not only a current issue but has existed dating back to the 1940’s. In the 1940’s and 1950’s ivy league schools used to secretly pay players in order to attract top talent in the country. After more and more illegal salaries came into play, the scholarship was invented in order to stop the corrupt system and give the players more of a reward. The NCAA is technically a nonprofit organization, however generated billions of dollars each year, needless to say that it is and has always been a business.

There is blatant, inarguable proof that the players and their talents are being exploited. These athletes are the draw to the games. They are the reason people watch and cheer on their teams. The amount of money given as a “full” scholarship is a marginal benefit only a drop in the bucket when compared to the market value of a player’s talent and skills. Athletic scholarships, as will be explained later, is indeed financial assistance but still leaves the student athlete living below, or at best slightly above, the poverty line. The NCAA and the respective universities has a duty to be concerned with the overall well-being of its players, not just whether or not an injury would keep their star player from playing in the upcoming game. The NCAA ought to consider the social responsibility of meeting the needs of its players, subsequently initiating a reformation of the NCAA bylaws concerning paying college athletes.

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.

College athletes are not being paid for their labor, which schools profit from. “The NCAA (National College Athletics Association) earns about $4 billion in licensing fees each year. In 2010, the NCAA signed a 14-year, $10.8 billion contract with CBS and Turner Sports to have exclusive rights to show the men’s college basketball tournament, which takes place every year” (Miller). Student-athletes are being exploited by the NCAA and there’s nothing they can do about it. Exploitation happens when student-athletes, who are making large amounts of money for their schools, often are not receiving any kind of admissible, quality education. Another form a student-athlete is exploited, the value of

Salaries, wages, and compensations have always been major and generally controversial topics in democratic America. And, with the rising popularity of college athletics, particularly football, compensation (or lack thereof) for college athletes has recently been a hot topic in American sports. While some of the debate stems from the similarity between responsibilities college athletes have to their programs and those of professionals, most of the issue involves the principles of amateurism. Recent “scandals” involving college athletes such as Terrelle Pryor, Johnny Manziel, and Todd Gurley have raised questions about the ethics of amateurism, particularly with regard to the NCAA organization. The issue is found in a very gray area, where there is most likely no definitive one-size-fits-all solution, but the resolution of this issue is one that will change and shape the future of college athletics across the national landscape.