Off the mark - like a brick. The moneyed players who drive this game, and therefore have the biggest voice and most impact, are already in the pocket of Adidas/Nike/Under Armour. Zion Williamson speaking out when his mother has already taken cash from Nike? How likely is that to happen?
Ignoring the economic facts underlying what drives billion dollar corporations to cheat the system and ignore the fact that greedy parents are in control - not 15,16 year-old kids - well, how legit can this article be?
Need evidence? Look at transcripts of Brian Bowen, Sr's NCAA testimony of how he took Adidas cash for his son for Louisville commitment. Then cried about it when caught. $100k from Adidas. Tip of the iceberg.
2
"Sham amateurs", yes. Also sham "students". Colleges should stop allowing themselves to be used as farm systems for professional sports. Let the NBA and NFL develop minor league programs like those for MLB and the NHL, and let the colleges and universities concentrate on (guess what?) education.
11
Most college athletes will never earn a dime in professional sports but if they have a full scholarship, the school is likely to grant hundreds of thousands in benefits. Tuition, room and board, books, tutors, stipends, coaching, fitness and health training and service. Most college students graduate with debt, scholarship athletes can have degrees, debt free and a headstart on life.
Want to reform and make college sports more fair to gifted athletes, stop the side deals with coaches, keep sports agents out of the mix, rein in boosters.
This is not a civil rights issue. It's an issue of responsibility involving students, sports, money and oh yes, taxpayers that foot the bill for schools their families may find...unaffordable.
1
Loved that it was Virginia vs. Texas Tech in the finals last night. For the first time since 1979, both teams in the title game were fighting for their first NCAA championship. Ask yourself why it took so long for this to happen.
Do you think its going to be any easier for schools like these two to compete with perennial favorites such as Duke if they have to pay their players?
I thoroughly enjoy when my alma mater wins.
But we the fans are the ones who keep this system going.
We keep going to the games and pay exorbitant ticket prices to see amateurs play.
We watch these games at home and at sports themed restaurants on one of the hundreds of millions of over sized TVs and help the networks make their fortunes.
If and when we stop attending the games and/or watching on TV/streaming video, the NCAA may lose its power.
I'll see palm trees and warm beaches here in MI during the winter before the former happens.
The NCAA is nothing but a modern day slave master making billions off of these kids who can’t accept a cup of coffee. It’s gross and disgusting and all of you people who say they get a scholarship are just as bad. Pay them now!!!!!!!!!!
1
@Steve
I live in Indianapolis, where would I find the billions “made” by the NCAA? It’s amazing to me how people will believe anything when there is an article about the “man” holding people back. The instant 99% of all players are done competing their ability to generate any income through athletics is zero. Fans support their teams. The players come and go. College athletics is subsidized by the school general budget. There is no profit. There are no millionaire employees of the NCAA. If there are, please tell me their names so I can verify the truth of these claims of “billions.”
It would be wiser if amateurism across all sports would be addressed in one action. The easiest solution would be just to set age limits for competitions and disregard whether someone has been paid or not. Think about it, Duke University, one of America's finest academic institutions, admits an athlete who they know will stay for only one year. (And he likely stopped attending spring classes as soon as they lost in the tournament so he can prepare for the draft.) Pay everyone!!
1
@Eric
Since the athletic departments run deficits, where would the money come from to pay the players?
@Shamrock
Exactly! Probably from closing down other sports programs that aren't as important as basketball. Not fair to college athletes who play baseball, lacrosse, golf, etc.
These players receive a full scholarship with room & board and a cash allowance, not to mention a stage to perform on to advance both their skills and visibility to the world. That is a great advantage that most of us never had and that the overwhelming majority of our children will never have. That is more than enough payment for what they do.
Should the lowly ditch digger receive royalty payments from every building or structure that he worked on? Makes about as much sense!
@Michael
You're kidding me. Why should all those around these athletes make so much money, have no risk of injury, etc. and the athletes get relatively so little?
2
Ditch digger ain't bringing in hundreds of millions he walks they get another the players walk who do do they get?
1
@Michael Browder
They help create revenue but not profit. The amount of revenue in excess of expenses from men’s basketball goes to pay all of the other sports. One could argue that women’s sports prevents payment to men’s basketball. I don’t endorse that but if you want to know where the money goes, it goes to other men’s and women’s sports. People that want to divorce the men’s basketball program from the rest of the athletic department are unrealistic dreamers.
Please understand: the NCAA rules are maddening at moments and always in need of reform, but the basic criticism by Marc Tracy and all the rest of the sporting-world bloviators is that the college game is and should be professionalized. They see the schools pulling down tremendous money and think this should go to the players, and all else being equal they would have a point. But they don't because Tracy and the rest (ESPN is probably the single biggest noisemaker on this issue) refuse to see so much. They will not acknowledge the massive infrastructural investments, including training programs and cartellish tv contracts negotiated by the schools, that enable the athletes to improve and to gain profiles that they can then monetize in the professional leagues. Most of all, however, Tracy and the rest refuse to acknowledge the subsurface iceberg of student athletes, all the women and men who will go pro in something other than their sport. I have taught this vast body of students (not players) at four NCAA schools, and I can tell you that they know they are amateurs, that they see their scholarships as the means to a better life, and they work their butts off in the classroom. Tracy knows nothing because his entire view is circumscribed by the floor and the money and probably a deep desire to wreck what he doesn't understand.
6
@JET III
Wisest comment ever. Golf scholarships enabled my brother and I to pay for college at Big Ten schools. I went on to law school, he to a successful career in banking. To disregard what college athletic scholarships do for thousands and thousands each year. Every year is the height of foolishness. Marc Tracy couldn’t possibly write more lies and deception. College sports are a national treasure not found anywhere else in the world. Soccer players from around the world never see a college campus for a day. Athletes in the US graduate from college in such large numbers it’s routine and not news. Would you want your child to play soccer in Spain or soccer at Indiana University?
@Shamrock
If colleges start paying athletes on the basketball or football teams, do you think golf or soccer programs would still be around? That's the only way these schools will be able to find the money to pay them. A shame that other sports will suffer and others who could benefit like you and your brother did would have to find another way to pay for school!
1
If you get a free ride to college on an athletic scholarship - then you are an amateur, and do not deserve reimbursement. Skip college and go pro, or induce pro leagues to run their own sports leagues. Athletes do little more for society than provide entertainment. It's the engineers, doctors, technicians, scientists, artists and others who are paying their way through college who make the big contributions to society. Stop fawning over athletes!
2
The athletes bring in the cash the technicians not so much.
2
@dc You mean worship the money and not the value to society? All hail the dollar! In Babe Ruth's day the best athletes made about as much as the President of the U.S. Now athletes are automatic millionaires - except for the majority who blow their fortunes within 5 years of retirement. I wonder how much of Harvard's, Yale's, Stanford's, MIT's or Princeton's massive endowments were generated by athletes? Check it out.
1
Not all collage sports are televised and create revenue for the schools. Powerhouse football and basketball programs will be able to pay their players higher salaries than smaller schools. This is not to say that there can be caps on amounts paid over the table to "student athletes". But should then shouldn't those with fencing and cross country scholarships also get paid? Maybe they should allow the athletes to profit from their images, off season public appearances, etc. There is nor good answers. But when a collages gymnast falls and hurts herself and then has her scholarship taken away because she cant perform the next year.
(University of Minn.) something should be done to protect the athlete. At the moment the schools hold all the power.
The is one obvious solution to the problem of college player compensation which no one is willing to discuss.
The NBA and NFL must be forced through government action to create minor leagues akin to Major League Baseball. The fact is college basketball and football are publicly subsidized minor leagues, from which the NBA and NFL owners benefit at no cost. This needs to stop. The NFL and NBA should and must pay for their own player development rather than getting it free with the public bearing the expense. Further, if the the NBA and NFL did develop professional minor league rather than use the sham collegiate/amateur system in place, the players would be members of their league's respective players unions (as is the case in baseball), and receive pay and benefits negotiated through collective bargaining, compared to the big nothing they receive today. (And spare me the nonsense about them getting an education. It is an open secret that these athletes are not at school to study.)
This abhorrent situation will continue as long as the NBA and NFL owners are allowed to get free player development at the expense of the states and colleges. Player protests and incremental court challenges are not sufficient. Until government takes action, or a an entrepreneur starts an independent minor league which pay players enough to dissuade them from playing for free in college, the current mess with it attendant scandals will continue.
3
@Christopher Johnston There is no present for any change. The MBL, NBA, NFL, NHL, and soccer all already have developmental leagues. Baseball, hockey, and soccer have had minor leagues seemingly foreover. Basketball has had officially-recognized developmental leagues, including the G League, since 2001. Football players have had minor leagues for nearly a century, and off and on the NFL sponsored developmental leagues in North America and Europe, outdoor and indoor, since 1946. Put simply, the outlet for non-scholastic athletes has always existed. That's where Johnny Unitas came from. No reform of the current system is needed other than for schools to have the discipline to reject athletes who can't cut it in the classroom. Marc Tracy is completely off base.
1
Pay college players. BUT, those paid players then pay for tuition, room and board, books, tutors, uniforms, and travel. Save scholarships for athletes who are in college to get an education as well as play.
1
@JSBNoWI
i like that notion.
and, weirdly, it would put a bunch of pressure on players on how to disburse that stipend amongst family & friends.
vouchers, yes; money, no.
Many comments note that most sports programs lose money as a reason to not pay players or to not have college sports at all. This is misleading.
1)Donor relation and fundraising events are often centered around school sporting events.
2)There is little incentive for athletic departments to turn a profit. There are numerous accounting procedures (tricks?) that are used to ensure budgets are used fully. https://www.sbnation.com/2019/2/28/18242974/college-sports-athletic-department-profit-revenue-money
The question should not be whether educational compensation is sufficient. The question should be is the compensation fair based on the value these sports generate for the schools.
2
I don't know how they do things at the University of Connecticut but where I went to school resident students had a full meal plan. No one went to bed hungry. For me, it was usually just the opposite. These athletes get free rides which should include room and board. If the NCAA doesn't allow that, that's just plain weird.
1
My local college is nothing but a plantation with the professors as slave owners and the students giving them wealth and all they get in return are sleepless nights, endless debt, sexual assaults, and rejection letters from employers.
Why not change it and pay the students? How are they supposed to live on debt? Maxed out credit cards aren’t good at McDonalds. Where is the fairness? Time to shut down these colleges. Some have graduation rates below 75%. What a scam.
3
Abolish the charade that is intercollegiate athletics. Make schools about learning, and sports about selling tennis shoes.
5
It's the kids who get cheated out of playing at all just because someone in their family took money from an alum or from a shoe company or whatever. The kids are the ones hurt. That's heartbreaking, because it's the kids who come from homes where they may indeed not have had enough to eat that get hurt the most by the NCAA's draconian rules.
2
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2003/jan/18/newsstory.sport2
This is how the (formerly) civilized world deals with raw athletic talent. In addition to the 13K P - $22K USD he earned as a player, he also made 500K P - about $875K USD for his likeness, in 2003. As a 16 year-old.
Why? If you don't know I really can't explain, but if you have the chops like Rooney does in Europe, or South America, or Asia, or anywhere but in the land of the free you get paid for it.
How, do you ask, in our free-market system, is this so? Because the Europeans are much more concerned about free trade and maintaining competition. Paying people room and board and providing an already existing seat in an already existing classroom where they are compelled to produce additional labor, well, gee, that looks a lot like slavery to me.
Time to pay up. Amateur has always been an appellation given to privileged white elites (of which, ironically, I am one) to keep out the hoi-poloi, the workers, the strong, the dedicated, the dark-skinned, and the poor. Maintaining amateurism in this modern era is the maintenance of class warfare. Predominantly white male coaches are paid enormous sums for other people's footspace by other rich white men (sorry Phil, but it's true); the rules are applied by an organization with no legal authority to do so (when is the last time you voted for an NCAA administrator?) whose only interest is its ridiculous self-preservation.
This is the definition of corruption.
5
Let's say the NCAA pays men's basketball and football players. Does the Duke football punter get paid as much as Zion?
Then the NYT will complain about women not getting paid and Title IX. However, all sports outside of men's football and basketball tend to lose money. Where would the $ come from to pay for women's basketball players? What about the men's track team. All these athletes work equally as hard. It's just that there is little public interest to fund them.
3
the question you need to be asking is, what do Collegiate Sports at any level have to do with the academic mission of colleges and universities? only in the United States is there this absurd linkage
7
@Dan
Maybe there is an economics professor somewhere in these Universities that can help determine the free market value of these athletes labor
Do you ask what marching bands have to do with education? Why is athletics considered separate from education but the arts are not? Athletes have gifted physical skills—it is intricate and demanding dance. It requires strategizing and synchronizing and, in team sports, coordinating.
I worked at a DIII university where it was assumed athletes were stupid, yet athletes placed a large percentage of their group on dean’s lists and persisted when many non-athletes dropped out after one or two years.
I saw visual art, music, and theater students struggle in non-arts classes, but most athletes were strong students in their classes. DIII does not offer athletic scholarships, personal tutors, or special meals for the athletes. Students applying for academic scholarships cannot refer to participation in high school sports. Why not??!! Are music students prevented from mentioning pep band? Do theater students have to omit one-act plays they were in?
High school athletes are often heavily involved in many aspects of extra- and co-curricular activity, but still we minimize athletics. I think it’s a huge mistake. Talent is talent and we should recognize, reward, and courage ALL students to use and enhance the talents they have.
The NCAA is rotten to the core, as persistent and repeated scandals have made clear.
College sports has also become rotten to the core. It's a mockery of the education colleges are supposed to be providing. They're not in the "entertainment" business -- or not supposed to be.
THE USA is essentially the ONLY nation on Earth where college sports has been puffed up into an utterly grotesque parody of what they're supposed to be. Clean the stables and GET RID of this sickening, hypocrisy-riddled farce!
8
The "one and done" is a clear admission that these are not *student* athletes at all, so let's stop implying that they are in some ways like any other student. They have no interest in education, they are not admitted for their academic performance or potential, they are not writing papers (by themselves) or spending hours in labs.
But they also are not being exploited any more than an unpaid intern or research assistant is exploited. The upside is so gigantic that they can easily endure a year honing their skills and getting noticed. A PhD student who finds a cure for cancer has his future in medical research secured. A basketball player that averages triple doubles for a year is worth a mint. If only I could be so exploited.
3
Exactly what power do these players hold, when most of the elite stars are "one and done"? How are they going to be voices for change when many of them won't be around long enoygh to participate in any meaninful discussion about change? Where will Zion be next year?
4
Good article as well as good comments. There is no solution that will easily be achieved. Greed. Far too much greed at all levels.
7
Since college football and basketball players are the talent for a multibillion dollar television production,
I think they should join SAG -AFTRA. All players would get the daily minimum rate that people involved in A television or movie production receive for hours they are actually playing and practicing their sport. They then should get the rights to their images so that they could Get shoe contracts and sell jerseys or sign Autographs. That way the stars would receive more than the base rate that the extras get.
1
Of course student athletes should be paid. The amount of money they generate for the NCAA and their schools, both directly and indirectly is immense and they deserve some compensation. I'm not talking millions, but putting a little money in the pockets of student athletes ($30k?) would also help to reduce the influence of alumni and reduce scandals. The only thing standing in the way of these common sense actions is the greed of the NCAA.
3
@RER. Do you realize what their scholarships are worth? The coaching? The room and board? The TV exposure? The $30k a year is nothing in comparison.
4
@Typical Ohio Liberal
What good is a scholarship if they don't give you the time to study?
Coach and College gets paid A LOT, students nothing!
Room and Board - is that a joke?
TV exposure - In hopes that you will reap money in the future--what about now?
5
@Typical Ohio Liberal
And if the player snaps a knee, they get nothing. That's 'employment at will' not a scholarship. program
4
The exploitation of elite college athletes is a national disgrace, compounded by how the NBA and the NFL receive yet another form of corporate welfare through the sham of "amateur" college athletes. This grotesque multi-billion-dollar charade exploits college athletes, discarding all but tiniest percentage who make the big leagues, but whose professional careers are of enormously varying lengths. As Taylor Branch wrote in The Atlantic some years ago, elite college sports are nothing but a "plantation system," and the NCAA is little more than a slave owner and slave trader.
3
@A - A year of "exploitation" as a prerequisite for contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars is a very small disgrace. Anybody here who wouldn't take that?
2
@A
No slave was ever treated like a college athlete. What an insult to the memory of slaves.
3
@A
Seriously? Then go play for a Division II or III school or don't go at all and see what your chance are for the NBA or NFL draft. You want to get your name out there for that tiny chance of making it, then go play for Duke or Notre Dame. If your chances are slim, stick it out for 4 years for a free education and a degree and feel fortunate you're not saddled with heavy debt after graduating.
How anybody can compare this to slavery is bewildering to me! Slaves have no say in determining their destiny. A student athlete on a full scholarship has choices. Not many students have that luxury!
This whole issue of whether or not elite athletes who will likely go on to very highly paid careers in professional sports should be paid more while at college seems silly - a story line pushed by journalists when most folks could care less. I thought the whole idea of having big time sports programs was to support the colleges/universities as a whole...?
3
I thought whole idea of big-time college sports is to support colleges and universities..."
to quote the late Richard Feynman, surely you jest
1
Players already do reep the rewards from their labor. Further, all but 5 University athletic departments in the country lose money for their institutions. Where would the money come from?
Zion Williamson had hours of FREE national TV coverage of every minute of his career at Duke. This will result in outsized shoe contracts, an NBA contract, and countless millions in endorsements. Did any of you know Zion Williamson one year ago - NO - and the development of his brand has incalculable value.
Players get the best coaching, rehab, medical treatment nutrition, advice on going pro, and, if they are interested, as education. This all has value but is overlooked in the author's argument.
7
@MakeThemPay!
If Zion went straight to the NBA his name recognition would be a fraction of what it is now.
1
The whole thing is a joke, at least in basketball at the top level. The players are not students in any sense of the word. Not that too many ever really were, but some were. With "...One-and-Done...", it's all a joke. The players have no actual connection to the universities they "...represent...".
Baseball is the only sport that takes an honest approach. Kids can sign with a team or they can matriculate. If they start college, then they cannot be drafted until their class graduates, whether they do or not.
"...Minor..." sports, especially Womens teams are semi-legit. Club sports are semi-legit. Small college/D3 sports a sa general rule are semi-legit because nobody is going to the NBA from there.
For the rest of it?
Zion and his pals should be professional athletes and not playing for Duke at all. I am not a big fan of the Ivy League per se but at least their guys are more-or-less students and stay all 4 years.r
3
Terry Porter went from DIII to pro. There are likely others.
I do not see where the players have leverage. While I saw the guy on CNBC that has started non-school sports league, and he sounded very earnest, I just do not see it happening. Very few of these players are pro caliber. Yes, they get millions of people to watch them as part of NCAA, but only because they are tied to schools with regional and alumni connections. The latest iteration of a pro football league using players that at least got a shot at the NFL just died a quick death. The NCAA games are only exciting because the players make mistake after mistake. They miss easy shots, they do stupid fouls, they forget the fundamentals of the game they play. If each team was not flying some school’s banner, no one would bother.
The schools make the money because they are why people watch.
2
OK...they come out of HS...they get a scholarship and board, training, coaching, TV exposure (essentially an interview for a job that pays millions) and this is an exploitation? I think we have bigger issues to contend with than the way a bunch of spoiled athletes are only getting the equivalent of maybe $100,000 a year tax free to play a child's game. No one worries about real workers anymore. For every article about the decimation of the labor movement over the past 30 years there are twenty articles are how these poor athletes aren't getting their fair share. This is not a problem. They don't want to play, then sit out a year and go directly to the NBA, problem solved.
7
For the umpteenth time, the NCAA is a criminal conspiracy that should be prosecuted under RICO statutes. I care some about the college athletes in revenue sports but I care more about the damage Big Time College Sports, Inc. does to the larger goals and values of higher education. Crass commercialism and mindless tribalism are other, collateral consequences of the current system.
3
The author neglected to cover the impact of fans. Imagine if we supported boycotts of players in the college bowls or March Madness!
Loss of revenue from broadcasters, sponsors & venues would impact the NC2A to come to its senses...hit them in the pocketbook for reforms.
2
Professional athletics has no place on college campuses to start with. Let the labor and management of this highly for-profit enterprise duke it out in the commercial marketplace where they belong. And let our colleges stop worrying about scandals, bizarre rules, systematic hypocrisy, widespread rule-breaking, and unelected 'commissioners' living it up on the labor of working men and women pretending to be students.
5
The NCAA is all over the N and the two As, but their relationship to what's meaningful about the Cs is a pathetic sham. What's missing in the conversation is a committment to academic standards; remember them? They keep speaking and advertising their "student athletes", when it's obvious, through set-aside admissions policies, scholarships, tutors, no-show coursework, and assorted fig leafs, that athlete students would be a more accurate term, but would still fail to do justice to the best practices for the students who happen to be athletes.
It may be too late for this type of significant reform; athletic departments of the hundreds of colleges and universities have far too much clout and are as venal about making money as TV advertisers are about pushing their goods.
3
Only pay the Student Athletes in major sports that stay for four years and graduate! Otherwise let them free
The last time Fluke University had a scandal of this magnitude, the Lacrosse team was accused of raping a non-student woman. She eventually admitted she lied.
We will await the verdict of this scandal.
Recall, that another Tabacky U. down the road was able to escape NCAA sanctions for academic cheating while other schools were penalized. Jury is out, but if guilt is found, do not expect any slaps on the hand -- supposed blue bloods are active in Indianapolis.
1
Modern indentured servitude period
Just call it what is
2
My heart breaks for these academically unqualified people getting into world-class universities for absolutely free just because they can throw a ball into a hoop.
8
@Kate
I take that as a vote to end affirmative action. These players count as affirmative action students. They are not in a different category. Many Times writers state that opposition to affirmative action is racism.
2
I have been following college basketball for over fifty years and I have never seen a college player's name on the back of a jersey while he is playing in college. That is a specious argument which also belies the reality that universities are non-profit institutions that tend to barely break even. At the University of Minnesota for example, in 2017 they took in about 115 million in profits but had about 113 million in expenditures, the difference of which they had to spread over 35 programs. It's not feasible and the arguments are patently absurd.
3
@Brian
I think there is confusion over the definition of revenue and profit. You can have revenue, but it doesn’t always result in profit.
The problem is that job actions take time to organize and time to execute. Not to mention resources. The players are only there for four years--the best players with the most leverage, for even fewer. They need help from their legislatures.
1
The money doesn’t have to come from the schools. Why can’t athletes be compensated for their likeness in video games? Or a portion of jersey sales with their name on the back? There is a lot of money in the hands of companies like Nike, Reebok, Under Armour, etc.
Also, there is a difference between athletes in basketball/football and every other sport. When we talk about athletes getting paid we are probably just talking about the big two sports. There are also students playing lacrosse, hockey, and tennis that will never really get much name recognition. For them, a scholarship is probably reasonable compensation.
@Pete
Because it's against NCAA rules--that needs to change.
Completely agree. Then, too, the sham of tax deductions (viz. subsidies) for "college/university athletic programs" can end concurrently. There has been NO educational value AT ALL in NCAA Div. I athletic programs for some time .. just some good entertainment.
6
Universities should be for learning - something that often seems largely forgotten in these hyper-competitive sports empires known as Div I schools (as well as many others). Get rid of sports in schools - yes... high school, college, like most of the developed world - have clubs and intramural sports where kids can learn sportsman-, sportswoman-ship and teamwork, etc. We are falling further and further behind the rest of world - especially China - in education and scholastic achievement. I would say it is far more critical to focus our attention on that deficit rather than debate the merits of what coaches and their players should earn. And then you can put a fork in the NCAA too.
6
I unreservedly support amateurism in school sports, including in college. I don't believe student athletes should become employees of the school or should be paid for joining
a team, but school teams should be comprised of regular students. That's the fundamental point of college athletics--to permit students to participate in regulated athletic competition. It's an aspect of education and life-skill building; it's fun; and it fosters school pride and camaraderie among students, alumni and local fans. It's not meant to be a professional minor league.
It's the same reason we have amateur sports in high school. *Exactly* the same.
I do think in an ideal world budding pro athletes would have professional minor leagues where they can hone their skills for their desired profession. But I don't think students who are "in it for the money" should ruin amateur college sports for everyone else.
I'd like the author to provide some solutions by which amateurism can be retained in school. So a student can decide if he or she wants to play on the school ice hockey, gymnastics, swimming, basketball teams, etc. Or alternatively, he or she can choose to become a professional athlete and find a paying team or corporate sponsor.
To me, the most sensible solution is to reform the professional league age minimum requirement so that basketball and football players can play in the pros directly out of high school.
To say it again: please don't ruin college sports.
10
@Mmm Oh, yes, please do ruin college sports because they are ruining the college experience: education and self-discovery.
@Renaissance Man Bob Kruszyna
How many college athletes do you think turn out to be professionals? Or even hope to be? Like what, 2-4%?
College athletics is an extracuricular activity for students just like in high school. The fact that a handful of top NBA prospects want to be paid in cash for the year they play for a marquee college team doesn't mean the whole concept of amateur college athletics should be upended to suit their commercial desires.
Now maybe we do agree that if we set up a separate professional minor league for every hoop dreaming college star and just let college sports be comprised of regular students, the college game would be enhanced.
Amateurism in college sports (not skill level) is its most important feature.
2
Apologists say that the players get free room and board but remember the slaves got room and board as well. As for free tuition, what does it cost to put an extra chair in a classroom and put a student in the automated school system? Zero. This really is modern-day slavery 2.0 and coaches like Coach K are at the nexus of this exploitative system. He gets paid millions more that he would if the players were compensated properly.
But there is also an argument that Coach K and other Division 1 coaches are actually underpaid. Coach K's "program" directly brings in tens of millions in TV revenue and ticket and jersey sales. Plus sponsorships from Nike and others. Much of this money goes to support non-revenue sports at Duke and build out the athletic department administration. In addition, the publicity from the team promotes student enrollment, government research grants and alumni donations and support - representing many millions in revenue. (Would any of us know of Penn State without Joe Paterno?) Coach K rightfully deserves much more of this money but, being the charitable man we see on TV, he is happy to give up some of his money to support these other teams and the college's alumni fundraising. But not to players. Interesting.
However, things are improving. Just as the slave owners used to be charitable in allowing their slaves to get married (a good slave owner), colleges now let their players have decent amounts of food. Wow, how generous of them!
5
@SMC
I actually think a free college education for a young man is a good thing. Only a tiny fraction of college scholarship athletes will ever make money as a professional. I know I didn’t. Went to law school instead.
1
The issue is more complicated than these articles portray.
What is true:
coaches make an absurd amount of money
Some schools receive a lot of money from football and basketball.
Athletes are given full scholarships, room and board, tutoring worth from $30,000 to $50,00...but no money
Only the top 20 or so universities make money
Money from revenue sports help to pay other sports: tennis, swimming, field athletics, field hockey, volleyball, baseball. Division I must filed 12 sports and there must be equality between men and women sports.
The great majority of college sports are subsidized by their universities :
"In other Division I conferences, public institutions subsidized athletics programs with $9.6 million on average in 2009.2009. Direct institutional support nearly doubled, from an average of $4 million to $7 million annually, while student fees contributed an average of approximately $7 million."
If students are to be paid: which ones? Only football and basketball players? And are only the athletes from money making institutions going to be paid? Are first team players going to be paid more than third strings? How about the star quarterback, does he get paid more? If they get paid, will they have to pay their own college fees? There are dozen more issues that arise.People criticizing the present system should address these issues and find an equitable solution
7
I live in a state where "college"basketball/football has taken over the minds and hearts of people, and the institutions where - in the distant past - scholarship was the aim of "higher education." I know some speak of the scholar/athlete and I'm pleased to know there are such individuals matriculating at our colleges and universities. I think the whole NCAA thing is just another money-hunt gimmick in guise of supporting sportsmanship, fairness, etc. And don't get me started on the obscene salaries paid to college level coaches...What a waste of money...I'm concerned that if the USA is ever going to be conquered by a foreign power, or an army of fifth-column marauders, it will be because nearly everybody is somewhere, glued to the "tube," hoping "they and their team" will win the "big one..." Do away with the NCAA, and reorganize college sports in some more equitable way that would emphasize not necessarily winning or losing, but how one plays the game...Take Care!
4
Why are we making this so complicated? The athletes should get what the market will bear for their services, including at a University.
Way back when, the librarians, cafeteria workers, team mascots, play-by-play announcers were often students. But most schools over time transitioned to non-student professionals for all of these services. Schools also hire A-List comedian and music acts to play their campus when before there was only the student a capella group. Can we just end this charade? Division III and the Patriot and Ivy Leagues in DI are the only true college sports.
2
@Joe Sazerac- So how much does a Duke or Kentucky bball player get? Then how much does a Cornell or NYU player get? Same? If the pay is market driven then it's just like any pro sports league and only a small percentage of schools could actually fund any sports at all. Slippery slope to say the least.
1
@Joe Sazerac. Right. End all athletic scholarships and other favoritism afforded athletes. Only students who have demonstrated that tey can do the work get in.
2
@DesertCard
Only at a few colleges do the 'revenue sports' provide any revenue at all -- especially after all the hidden subsidies are subtracted, and especially after recognizing that a lot of the 'alumni donations' that successful sports allegedly bring are earmarked exclusively for those sports.
1
It seems that what we need it just a bit more diversity in the ecosystem.
We should have a farm league system for both basketball and football for players coming out of high school. Players would be paid and advanced according to their talents. The teams would be sprinkled around the country based on ownerships estimates for maximizing revenue.
At the same time, we should keep Div 1 b-ball and football. High school players who are not shooting to make it to the NFL or NBA would purposefully choose college althetics. There's enough talent out there, and enough alumni passion, that those top leagues would still generate a lot of revenue--enough revenue that there would still be scholarships, etc.
But, since the college athletes did have a legit choice to have gone the farm league route, it would be hard to argue that they were being exploited.
College scholarships could be structured so that if the athlete didn't complete a degree in, e.g., six or seven years, he'd have to pay back the scholarship. Or, there could be a restriction on entering the pros for four years after your first year of an scholarship.
Some athletes might still go the college route to get to the pros. The difference would be that they would have to delay a pro career for at least four years. But some might like the academic challenge and see the visibility from college television contracts as a great path to get to the pros.
It's not one or the other, it's both.
3
@NA Expat Good ideas. The NBA already has a developmental league and the money's not bad. A question not yet posed, I think is this: Why should the students of any university be penalized with higher fees, fellow students who aren't on campus and in classes when they have no interest in being there, and all the rest of the junk that goes with intercollegiate sports at the big-time level? Establish minor leagues for all these sports. Pay the players. Promote the minor leagues. Keep college for the students. Save money by the universities, nearly all of which lose a bundle on sports.
2
If the coaches are paid millions then the players should be paid too. College sports are not armature if they have video game licensing rights etc.
2
If they get paid then they should pay for their own college tuition, books, room and board. That would cost them a minimum of $200,000 for 4 years but probably more for most D1 schools.
1
I just want to watch some college athletes compete for the love of the game. No money, just pure unadulterated glory. If that doesn't sound like a fair bargain to you, don't pursue college athletics!
6
I think foreign universities have shown that it is possible to be an outstanding academic institution without having big money sports, let alone without being competitive in big money sports. Our colleges have shown that it is possible to be competitive in big money sports without being an outstanding academic institution, possibly without even being much of an academic institution at all. My suspicion is that we would be better off with the baseball model - let all the other professional big money sports operate their own farm club systems while colleges get out of the business and compete on other grounds.
19
@Doug Karo
"I think foreign universities have shown that it is possible to be an outstanding academic institution without having big money sports." So has an American university; have you heard of the University of Chicago?
1
@Doug Karo That is there. This is here.
There's obviously an uneven power dynamic at play with college athletes and the institutions they attend. It's easy to say that they provide a service that makes others money, therefore they should be paid. But I've never seen anyone give an account of how to actually implement paying student athletes.
Does Zion get paid the same as everyone else at Duke? Is there a salary cap for each school? Are huge sports programs like Duke, UNC, and UK allowed to pay athletes more than the smaller programs? Can schools sign students to multi-year contracts like the NBA/NFL or can students leave at will? What about different sports? Does a quarterback make the same as a left tackle? Is there a universal pay grade per position? How about red shirts and walk ons? What about the sports that aren't broadcast on CBS? Do crew teams, lacrosse teams, tennis players, baseball teams, etc. also get compensation? Are male and female athletes going to be paid equally? How about the non D1 NCAA athletes?
I have no idea what the answer to any of these questions are, but if anything is going to change in the current system these will need to be addressed. The current system is unfair but I don't think it's as simple as it's often made out to be.
6
I disagree with the assessment that the onus to make a change should be on the athlete. Remember that they are STUDENT athletes so they already have two demanding, sometimes conflicting, roles. Furthermore they're young with little perspective on the matter and by the time they have a chance for their perspective to mature, they're out of the system. This would seem to be a perfect opportunity for the broader student body or paid professional athletes, who've traveled this road, to coordinate with their unpaid counterparts to remedy this issue.
In addition to all of the financial benefits let's not forget what these athletes do for the broader campus and alumni communities. No matter where I am in the world I can find a place to watch a game and inevitably bond over the shared affection for our team. It is difficult to overstatement how far their efforts go toward building community amongst people and creating networks of opportunities. Two syllables do more to connect me to my fellow alum than any shared major, student group, or honor society: Go Blue.
1
@B: What sort of "community?" Rooting for a team? So that's enough for all the costs of the mess we call intercollegiate sports? C'mon, man.
The part of this that I find interesting is that everyone has the same hours in a day, power 5 athletes may have more pressure but your athletes outside the power 5 conferences put in as much time as athletes at the blue blood programs; as do athletes in div 2; division 3 and NAIA also put in similar hours.
The one difference is the academic resources allotted to these athletes at the top schools. Many of these programs have their training table with a nutrition planned back by state of the art scientific research. As well as nearly unlimited access to tutors often inside a facility just for the members of this certain sport. So these student athletes need to only focus on sport and class, food and board and often much of their wardrobe is covered.
This is not necessary true for athletes in these lower divisions.
Also, what are we to say to those students who are going to class full time and working full time just to barely meet room and board costs? I’m sure they would gladly take on the rigors of being a student athletes for access to the top notch training table, free clothing and tutors.
Don’t act as though free education is something to balk at, if these athletes don’t take their opportunity and learn something that’s on them.
8
It seems like college players are squeezed from both ends- they are unable to share in the enormous revenue college athletics generates but dont appear to have the same rights as 'normal' students. Example- why is it that someone like Tom Izzo, MSU Head BB Coach, can scream at one of his players (captured on TV) while I imagine a professor who treated a student in the same manner might face what ... suspension, termination, worse? Time to treat college sports for what it is, a business, and pay the players or get out of high level athletics except for club teams on which any student can participate.
16
@DC: Nearly every college of university in the USA LOSES money on sports.
1
You know, if professional sports were responsible for their 'Minor Leagues' they would be paying for the medical injuries for these players. At the same time, maybe some brave and honest public university president would open the books to reveal how much goes into athletics rather than academics.
8
@RichardM Well stated. And, at the same time, the presidents might reveal the sources of their income donations and the connections of the their boards of Trustees/Governors to "sports"/entertainment.
@RichardM The athletic budgets of D1 schools are already public knowledge, even broken down by sport, including salaries.
I strongly support the ideas along the lines of what Mr. Yee proposes.
The current system does a disservice to faculty and staff who find they have to devote extra time to disengaged student-athletes who know they are short-timers. The current system is also a disservice to young, vulnerable student-athletes, stuck in the middle, who would rather be doing their sport than going to school.
5
Of course these athletes suffer injuries joint and back injuries that will affect them for the remainder of their lives. Not to mention the head trauma.
This does not happen to regular students.
Where are the NCAA and colleges at that point?
1
Better yet, just get rid of college sports. They serve no purpose whatsoever. I went to college on a partial sports scholarship. I don't really see now that benefited anyone but me.
And the "major" sports have simply become farm teams for the pros. Why should that be happening? Let them fund their own farm teams.
25
@Joe Rockbottom universities could rent out their names to professional teams and make money that way. There'd be no pretense that the athletes are students. It's a win-win.
1
@Joe Rockbottom I played D1 soccer on a full ride. You obviously missed something in your experience myself and my teammates cherished.
1
@Joe Rockbottom
The scholarship only benefited you? Who else could it possibly benefit? Who benefits from an academic scholarship? Alex, for $400, my answer is, “what is the student.”
1
So College Coaches can be paid millions of dollars but the players are amatuers?
And the players at most powerhouse schools like Alabama in football or North Carolina in basketball rarely graduate with a degree?
And the player's families are often poor or lower middle class?
And the NCAA is surprised when payoffs are made?
The NCAA is creating the problem and then are 'shocked' when agents and coaches provide financial incentives to the players and their families?
46
There seem to be two great divisions within college sports. Those sports that are the sources of lots of revenue, such as football and basketball, and those sports that are sinks of revenue, such as soccer, tennis, rowing and others.
How would you equitably compensate athletes if they participate in a sport that is not a money maker? Should a lineman in football or a point guard in basketball receive a share of the revenue their sport produces while students on the tennis or field hockey teams get nothing? Should a student who participates in an intercollegiate sport but is not on an athletic scholarship be compensated?
Should we simply get rid of all athletic scholarships and have teams composed of students who want to compete for their love of their sport(s)?
10
@Pete Yes, of course the members of the fencing team (not to mention the rowing team, and the ski team and other teams) should receive nothing, because their sport does not and will never generate a multi-billion-dollar television contract. It's this simple: if your activity generates income, you should share in the income. That's what a job is, and college athletes have a job that is playing sports. It generates huge incomes - for coaches, schools, TV networks and provides the NBA and NFL with a free talent pool. Elite football coaches get paid millions and the wrestling coach gets less because wrestling doesn't generate massive tv revenues.
1
@A Your statement implies strongly that money generating college athletics is a business and the athletic students should be compensated as employees.
Many businesses have performance evaluations for their employees and base compensation, salary + bonuses, on their performance. Under your approach, would an "All American" football player get more money than a bench warmer? If a player gets a season ending injury, can he be fired?
Perhaps a business model would be best for college sports. A college or university could divest itself of any academic requirements for athletes by creating separate entities such as a "State University Football Corporation". The athletes would perform for the university and alumni, compete against other "University Football Corporations", be paid for their performance, get bonuses for exceptional actions, and not have to attend classes other than football strategy, weight lifting, and improving 40 yard dash speeds. ESPN and other sports networks and professional teams can become part owners of these "University Football Corporations" to increase their revenue streams and purchase the best high school athletes.
Is college sports only about the money?
These articles remind me of the efforts intellectuals once made to raise the class consciousness of workers and are about as annoying. What star high-school basketball player doesn't already know that if he doesn't want to wait a year before being paid to play he can be play in a professional league other than the NBA? If he chooses to go to a college to play for no pay for year, he does so knowing full well there are alternatives (which, of his own volition, he chooses not to avail himself of).
5
@Luder At question is the fairness and ethics of the N.C.A.A. (in some instances) profiting from players. Why should a kid from North Carolina, like Zion Williamson, travel abroad to Turkey or Spain to get monetary benefits from their skills? Williamson should be able to enter into contracts in his own country on his own volition without the specter of sanctions while going to school and playing college ball.
@Luder At question is the fairness and ethics of the N.C.A.A., in some instances, profiting from players. Why should a kid from North Carolina, like Zion Williamson, travel abroad to Turkey or Spain to get monetary benefits from their skills? Williamson should be able to enter into contracts in his own country on his own volition without the specter of sanctions while going to school and playing college ball.
@Orlando Players in Williamson's situation can earn up to $100,000 a year playing for the NBA's developmental league (I forgot what it's called now) without having to go abroad. The great majority choose not to.
1
Players in NCAA revenue sports are college students, young people who have had little time to gain perspective on their situation and who will not stay long in the system. The long-time members of the system who have fiduciary obligations to advocate for the interests of students, including college athletes, are the faculties at NCAA institutions, which have campus-wide bodies that can act as advocates and to influence policy, and that can align at conference and NCAA-divisional levels to coordinate efforts to address these and many other issues of college sports.
Nowhere in this article are these faculties mentioned because they have, in general, shown little interest in providing these students the type and level of advocacy support that could create campus and conference level pressures to balance the power of the NCAA and the campus administrations that comprise it, and confront the sham of "amateurism" that allows revenue sports to be run as huge mega-businesses with radically under-compensated employees.
The rulings Judge Wilken has issued in the two key antitrust cases mentioned in this article provide ample and harshly stated evidence of the untenability of the NCAA's claim of amateurism, but provide no meaningful remedies. The Courts do indeed seem unwilling to risk destabilizing the business of college revenue sports. Without forceful advocacy from within the schools that host these programs, college athlete's prospects for reform are dim.
1
Why deprive these athletes a chance to reap the riches for their talents? If you are talented enough to generate millions for a university and its coaches, why not let them do it for themselves and their families? Does anyone believe they are in college for an education? Let them avoid this step, and let other student athletes compete for a 4 year scholarship. The market will determine if people still want to see college ball, developmental league, or the NBA.
4
Such an odd take by the author who believes that the power lies with young people who are likely 17-21 years of age. The adults (the NCAA, university administration, and boosters) need to start acting like adults and stop exploiting young athletes. And no, “tuition” is not sufficient compensation given the massive athletic workload athletes in revenue sports are required to take on. Anyone who has seen a division 1 athlete’s required work in the revenue sports knows that academics are given the back seat. No more one and done, the professional leagues need to pay for the development of young athletes who opt out of college.
23
@Maya EV If these players have a "massive athletic workload" then they shouldn't be in college. What about the easy academic "workload" they get. That doesn't compare to the "workload" most students worry about to graduate.
These players are getting FREE tuition. Do they realize what that is worth ? Many students are deeply in debt upon graduation. These athletes have separate athletic quarters away from the student population. I always assumed that "board " meant meals included. Today, athletes in high school can go to the G League for one year. I've read they can make 125,000/yr. One and done must END. Its a joke. 18-19 year olds want more "bargaining power " to make monetary decisions ? Really ? That tells me there is too much corporate money floating around on campus. What about attending class and cracking open a book ? Make a decision Either attend college on a serious level or prepare for professional sports.
These guys are greedy and want it both ways.
7
There is no failure on the part of these young athletes at all. Book education is not all that valuable to them right now. What is valuable to them is having time to improve at their sport and grow up a little before becoming a pro— being coached by some of the best in the world who have years of experience with athletes of their age and ability. These young players make way more money for their colleges than the colleges provide to them, and most of their fellow students love to have a team to support and cheer for. These athletes have made a decision—they will take what the best colleges offer them and play ball. And when the college system changes, the next crop of young athletes will respond. And athletes who left college to play their sport at the pro level, or never went while young, and went back and got a degree when they were older, are not unheard of. They owe us nothing. If we, the American public, didn't want to see them playing, we wouldn't watch.
1
@Pam: Then they don't belong in a college or university. And they are not generating enough money to make their sport even break even, save a very few with big TV contracts. The colleges and universities are complicit in this.
1
No! As a collegiate swimmer (4 years at Cal) the goal is an education.
13
@Stephen Cunha I think education is part of it, but its obvious to me that it isn't the only part. How do you explain coaches making million dollar salaries? In many states, college coaches are the highest paid public employees. And how does the purported goal of education fit into the large productions that are N.C.A.A. sports tournaments?
@Stephen Cunha These aren't mutually exclusive goals. But if we must make it an issue of one or the other. On the one hand, this statement misses the point entirely. On the other, you were in a revenue sinking sport with no professional league, so your opportunity cost is vastly different.
Mr. Cunha, There is a sharp distinction between the "revenue sports" (at most D1 schools, just football and men's basketball) and other sports. Many of the non-revenue sports are populated by motivated students with terrific work ethics spanning both sports and the classroom. Swimmers are well known to be disproportionately represented in that group, as are many others in the various Olympic sports. (And there are, too, sometimes exceptions among the revenue sports athletes -- the late Bill Bradley, who was a Rhodes Scholar, an NBA star, and a US Senator is an example.)
The revenue sports generate the funds that support Olympic Sports programs where the student-athlete ideal most often is reached, and that is often a rationale for limiting the compensation to revenue sports athletes. But it is never used as a rationale for limiting the compensation offered revenue sports (and other) coaches and athletics department administrators. Their salaries escalate because antitrust laws permit no coordinated effort to pause the arms race in leadership compensation. Those laws, unfortunately, have no teeth when it comes to the revenue sports athletes who create the basic value coaches and administrators profit from.
Strong antitrust remedies in the two cases recently adjudicated could have forced schools to choose between cutting non-revenue sports (alienating alumni donors) or cutting future athletics department salaries. I doubt many schools would have risked their donor pools.
Give NCAA athletes a cut of sports revenues AFTER they GRADUATE. The one-and-dones (or three-and-dones for football) get their payout when they go pro; those athletes are exploiting the college system as much as the schools are. The true student athletes should get a financial reward. Perform for your school, get a degree, and then get a cash bonus upon graduation.
5
@lstanton " Get a degree"...maybe after their professional career is over and they've already made millions. Not sure what a "true student-athlete" is in today's world. There are two groups of people on campus. Those who are students and those who are athletes. The real student -athletes are those that will never make the pros yet they perform well for their school. They receive free tuition and room and board also. The only ones who get much are the walk-ons.
In addition to paying players on college teams, may I suggest another important step: End the requirement that "student athletes" (what an oxymoron!) actually have to take classes. This would free players' time so that they could improve their sports performance, while freeing colleges and universities from maintaining "courses" designed to keep players eligible.
Of course financial costs of a college "sports program" would increase dramatically, which would lead many smaller colleges to abandon sports, thus freeing their money for genuine academic purposes, such as student financial aid and improving the student:faculty ratio.
6
I'm thinking about Steven Soderbergh's new film High Flying Bird, which quite poetically brought home the message that it is the players who have the power, not the owners, coaches, or board members. If the players unite, the whole corrupt system would come crashing down. At a recent Division I men's college basketball game I attended, I saw two coaches who made millions in salary, fans buying beer at $8.50/each while unpaid teenagers ran up and down the court. Pay the players, or at least give them a percentage of the beer sales.
34
I read in NYT how expensive college is, then how these athletes, who get free education at top universities, are unpaid and exploited. I have the solution: no more college sports. Let the professional sports leagues pay for the recruiting and training of their athletes, and let the institutions of higher learning teach and confer degrees.
66
Good point Roger, but what about scholarship players who are not good enough to go pro, who want a degree, and willing to spend four years being both student and athlete? What about student athletes who participate in sports that have no professional leagues who need the scholarship to attend college and earn a degree. I love NCAA basketball, I graduated from KU. The NCAA rules that are not enforced equally.
1
@Terry They got a free education - that is what they signed up for, after all, at an EDUCATIONAL institution.
The only fair thing would be to abolish Division I college football and basketball and create minor leagues for those sports akin to baseball's. 90% of these kids are not getting an education anyway. At this level, the idea of the student-athlete is nothing more than a sham.
Of course the colleges and the NCAA would never voluntarily surrender their gravy train.
22
The fact that this article is even being written shows you what is wrong with college athletics. These are not professional athletes, they are students. Ergo, they are not workers and there should not be any need to unionize. It's just absurd. And yes, the schools make some money off their games but keep in mind the cost of building and maintaining the ridiculously large venues in which these students train and compete. The schools have a right to earn that back through ticket and merchandise sales and TV rights, however inappropriate the whole arrangement might be in the first place.
3
Or, they can go to class like everyone else, get an education, and earn a degree.
17
@Frank: Or flunk out, since it would be important to eliminate the multitudinous tutors, minders, assistants and other administrators that tip the academic scales toward athletes, and the millions spent of special dormitories, dining halls, training complexes, stadia and, of course, the salaries of coaches and the myriad of assistant coaches who themselves weren't exactly Rhodes Scholar material.. But that would require Presidents with backbone and Boards of Trustees with a modicum of commitment to education. Fat chance.
Why do most Americans persist in believing the easily discovered and well-publicized fact that nearly all colleges and universities lose millions on sports annually?
2
Mike Krzyzewski said the other day that the NCAA was not ready to get rid of "one and done" although the NBA may be ready. I would assume he has a bunch of future one and done players in his pipeline. This from the guy who just a few years ago was dissing the Kentucky's of the world for their one and done success. What a hypocrite. The author is right on that Zion and others should refuse to wear anybody's "free" shoes as long as the coaches get the big money and the players get the shoes ( which may collapse).
5
It would take enormous strength and fortitude, but imagine if the players of both teams met about an hour before game time and agreed that they would NOT take the floor tonight until CBS ponies up $100,000.00 (just an arbitrary number), for each player. Regardless of how many minutes each player participates in.
I am sure that the NCAA would cancel the game and anoint the two teams co-champions. An easy out for them. But CBS is going to want their money back and THAT will be the beginning of the end. Next time, it will be all Final 4 teams then both football teams for the national championship game and on and on.
I can't see the NCAA existing under the current system going forward.
1
@Jay Sheehan - You honestly think that not 1, but 2 teams vying for a nat'l championship would actually do that? You must never have played sports
colleges should get out of the sports business. sports should run their own farm teams and pay their athletes. there should be no athletic scholarships
48
@true patriot- that's a lot of kids who are financially unable to afford college not getting an opportunity to attend college.
@DesertCard
No, financial aid is still available. It should not be tied to athletics.
It occurs to me that the same arguments used to not pay student players--education, amateurism and so on--were used in slightly harsher forms to promote slavery.
Given the lack of wages, the lack of healthcare for very physical labor and the lack of input into their working conditions, I really don't see it as all that far removed right now.
14
@Jacob Sommer Completey agree - see my comment below and google Taylor Branch's article in The Atlantic a number of years ago about the shame of college sports in which he referred to it as a "plantation economy."
The players are many, hard to organize, have a short time horizon over which to monetize their abilities. They face adversaries, the NCAA and its D1 programs that exploit them, that have a near monopoly on their workplace, are well organized and have a very long time horizon. The players wont get satisfaction through actions in the market ( strikes, organizing, etc.) they are just too weak. They are weaker than US professional athletes, who on average collect less than 50% of the revenues their sports generate at the very highest level (where you would expect their leverage to be the greatest). College players only shot is to go through the courts where the obviously unfair treatment they receive is clearly offensive. Eventually, right, which is on the player's side has to win out over might, which is on the NCAA's side.
1
@oldcolonial85 For crying out load these are 18-19-20 year old teenagers. They cannot even get a beer in a bar until 21. Everyone wants to "monetize " whatever they do. If you are good at skateboarding, can do a 360 on a motorcycle, repel up side of a mountain YOU SHOULD get paid for it. If you can solve Rubik's cube in 2 minutes YOU SHOULD get paid. Everything is about "monetizing ". This is what has ruined college athletics.
It makes sense that college athletes receive some compensation besides the travel, tutors, free tuition and board that they already receive. The big question is how much?
Thinking in business terms, an NCAA team like the UConn Huskies men's basketball team, is a department in a very large and often under-funded organization. It is unfair for the members of a marketable department to expect greater compensation than, say, the shipping department that works as many hours for work that is less appealing.
The NCAA athletes are part of a large educational organization, many of which struggle to make ends meet. It is fair that they receive some compensation, but schools need to keep the big picture in mind. How many students will lose their financial aid if more funds go to the high-powered athletes? How many services will be cut when the funding from school athletic teams goes to the athletes?
Will schools with large profitable research departments also have to compensate student researchers based on the value of their work and not the value of their education?
So, yes, they should be paid something. The big question is how much more than they are already getting in other benefits.
Three alternatives - get rid of intercollegiate sports or get rid of athletic scholarships. At least, Division 1 and 2. In no other country in the world do the institutions of higher education run an intercollegiate sports system.
But, I guess the money generated by a, largely, corrupt system will continued to drive the third alternative.
26
I agree with the general sentiment expressed by the author. I think in the interest of more balance he should have listed all the improvements that have been made for players since the Napier revelation, beyond the change in the food rules. Also, something that doesn't get mentioned that is a huge benefit to the super elite players is the marketing/branding opportunity they get by their one year of college ball. With a recent rule change, high school kids can go directly to the NBA D league right out of high school and get paid up to $100,000 in salary and partner with the sports marketing industrial complex. But how many will? Few I suspect because the marketing opportunity from college ball is too great to pass up. The only guys that are losing out by not getting a salary are the top line guys who aren't good enough for the NBA, maybe 50-100 max throughout college basketball for example. The rest of the guys are replaceable by guys on the bench who are almost as good
4
All colleges have internship programs for students to apprentice in real world jobs before graduating. Although very few college athletes will go on to play professionally, it makes sense that they should be getting paid something while they participate in an activity that is essentially a full time job. Any athlete risks getting injured. That's just part of the bargain and I don't think getting paid some relatively small amount offsets that risk. But these kids are devoting almost all of their time to a sport and generating lots of revenue for schools. They should get paid.
2
@TC They ARE paid - they get a free-ride college education.
8
@TC
1. It is not a full-time job to play varsity sports, it is more like 4-5 hours per day in season, 1-3 hours out of season.
2. Scholarship athletes are paid plenty: in public universities, tuition, room & board, tutoring, etc. is worth $20,000-$30,000 a year, a Duke or Stanford scholarship is worth $35,000 or more per year.
3
@Ted Goldenberg Glad we're in agreement that college players should be compensated. We just disagree in how they should be paid. You detail the value of the college scholarship. I assume you would be supportive of players taking that amount of compensation ($30,000 at a state school) not via a scholarship but in the form of cash?
1