The Ethics Of Amateurism And College Athletes

“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.

As the years have gone by and college sports attract larger crowds and generate more money, the question arises of whether or not star college athletes should be paid. The NCAA currently prohibits college athletes from receiving payment of any kind from the schools, boosters or endorsements. This is a hot topic in society because many consider the athletes to be “working” for the money only the school is receiving. However, some argue that there is a need for amateurism. In college sports, athletes work hard, but they should not get paid because the college part of the sports is what makes the money, not the athletes.

The authors begin the article discussing the creation of the NCAA and how they came to the creation of their amateurism laws, providing a background to as to why college athletes are not allowed to receive any form of monetary payment. Johnson and Acquaviva then present five arguments as to why college athletes should not be compensated. These arguments are that athletes are being paid with their education, new issues would arise with fair pay if college athletes were compensated, college athletes are receiving more than just an education, paying college athletes would eliminate competition, and that college athletes already know what to expect when they sign to play for a university. The authors then provide counter arguments that help to prove that college athletes should be paid for their play. These are that the cost of living is not covered in college scholarships, college athletes don’t understand that they will be set aside if they are injured or benched, and college athletes do not receive more than an education due to their full schedules. The authors then explain some of the plans that could help to fairly compensate college athletes, such as allowing them to receive endorsement deals. Finally, Johnson and

(Solomon 1) In the NCAA there are many laws that prevent the athletes from doing certain things. These laws are called the “Laws of Amateurism”. In general, amateurism requirements do not allow salary for participating in athletics, or prize money above actual or necessary expenses (NCAA Center). However Judge Claudia Wilken partially granted class action status in a lawsuit concerning the use of college athletes' names and likenesses. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken ruled the plaintiffs, including former and current Division I men's basketball players and Football Bowl Subdivision players, will be allowed to challenge the NCAA's current restrictions on what athletes might receive in exchange for playing sports. The ruling sets up the prospect of a fundamental change in scholarship rules and the concept of amateurism (Berkowitz 3). This would help athletes to be able to fight for the compensated pay.

The NCAA’s policy on amateurism has been around since the creation of the NCAA by Theodore Roosevelt. This policy was created to prevent teams from hiring ringers to play in games and to limit point shaving/corruption in collegiate sports. Currently, prospective student athletes have to be certified as an amateur by the NCAA Clearinghouse in order to compete in any competitions. Over the last decade, there has been an increase in the National Collegiate Athletic Association or NCAA’s policy on Amateurism. As previously stated, this policy has been around since the creation of the NCAA, but the elements of the policy are almost the same. According to the NCAA Manual, a student-athlete is considered an amateur if they have not: “signed a contract with a professional team, received payment for participating in athletics, played with professionals, received benefits from an agent or prospective agent, or agreed to be represented by an agent” (NCAA, 2015).

Abstract:  Collegiate athletes participating in the two revenue sports (football, men's basketball) sacrifice their time, education, and risk physical harm for their respected programs. The players are controlled by a governing body (NCAA) that dictates when they can show up to work, and when they cannot show up for work. They are restricted from making any substantial financial gains outside of their sports arena. These athletes receive no compensation for their efforts, while others prosper from their abilities. The athletes participating in the two revenue sports of college athletics, football and men's basketball should be compensated for their time, dedication, and work put forth in their respected sports.

In order to understand this controversy, a short lesson on key terms and concepts is necessary. First, the organization which this argument involves is called the NCAA, which stands for National Collegiate Athletic

The magnitude of the controversy to pay college athletes has intensified over the past few years. It might be due to the prevailing economic atmosphere causing everyone, including aspiring athletes, to look for new ways to make money. It might also be due to many higher educational facilities giving the public access to their annual budget, causing outsiders to focus on the profit of specific athletic programs. However, it might also be due to the coaches’ outrageous salaries and the money that universities make from bowl games and basketball tournaments. Regardless, this has intensified the fact that athletes see none of these profits and this is what implores the simple question of “where is my portion?”

The NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) was founded on March 31, 1906. It was founded by Theodore Roosevelt. Its headquarters are in Indianapolis, Indiana (www.wikipedia.org). The mission of the NCAA is to “be an integral part of higher education and to focus on the development of our student-athletes” (ncaa.org). The first inter-collegiate sports began in 1852 when

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.

Since the beginning of organized sports athletes have been pouring their heart and soul into playing the sport their hearts desire. It has always been the love of the game, the hard work and dedication that student athletes to the collegiate level. When athletes reach the collegiate level it is more or less a business, and their job is to bring in a profit for the university. Over the past few years students and others have wondered: should college athletes be paid? Student athletes shouldn’t be paid because they do get scholarships and it would be harmful to the university budget as a whole. In this essay I will discuss the effects of paying student athletes on the university and other athletes. Also, addressing issues such as exploitation and showing how much athletes are really receiving.

College sports are one of the largest and fastest growing markets in today’s culture. With some college sports games attracting more viewers than their professional counterparts, the NCAA is one of the most profiting organizations in America. Recently there has been controversy in the world of college sports as to whether the college athletes that are making their universities and the NCAA money should receive payment while they are playing their respective sport. Many believe that these athletes should be paid. Others argue that they are already receiving numerous benefits for playing that sport from their universities. Many of the proponents of paying college athletes are current or former college athletes who believe their hard work and hours put into practice and competing go under appreciated. They feel that while the athletes are making the university money, the athletes do not receive any cut of these profits. Opponents feel that athletes already receive numerous perks and should not receive extra compensation on top of the perks they already receive.

Despite devoting “forty to sixty hours per week to their sport most of the year, which is more than many full-time jobs, Division I football players aren’t considered employees and lack basic economic rights under the NCAA’s cartel restrictions” (Johnson). The NCAA made “$912.8 million dollars last year and are now poised to top the eye-popping mark of $1 billion in annual revenue” (Clotfelter). These types of figures prove that revisions must be made when it comes to paying student athletes. To be clear, “student athletes do not need salaries or monthly paychecks, even though the NCAA runs just like any other professional sports league” (Johnson). Rather than, they should simply be allowed to live within their means like anyone else in America.

Student athletes at division I schools, where an immense amount of revenue is generated at games and events, are not being paid for their work. This is immoral because the NCAA uses the athlete’s likeness and then the athletes get no direct (monetary) compensation. We should approach evaluating the morality of student athletes using the normative theory of Utilitarianism that supports the claim that student athletes are exploited in their work and on the other hand, Kant Ethics that claims the results of the athletes do not matter, because consequences do not matter.

Amateur sports at the collegiate level are intended to provide young men and women the opportunity to participate in sporting activities at which they excel while receiving an education that will serve as a springboard for a future career. The soft skills of team building, sportsmanship, self-discipline, and dedication are often considered to be highly valued and sought after by employers. The camaraderie and bonding among student-athletes is invaluable and unique to this experience. Unfortunately, the sanctity of collegiate athletics has been tainted by the unethical behavior of the very people purported to have the best interests of the student athlete at heart. Despite having rules in place against academic dishonesty, inconsistencies in enforcement of sanctions do little to curb the practice. Penalties for misconduct will need to be severe and consistent for every institution that is part of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) for the rampant academic fraud to become the exception to the rule rather than the norm.