Universities Paying Student Athletes: Ethical Or Not?

The topic of whether universities should pay student athletes has been a subject of debate for many years. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA could not prohibit student athletes from receiving payment for using their names, images, and likenesses. This ruling has opened the door for student athletes to receive various forms of compensation, such as booster gifts, endorsement deals, and corporate sponsorships. Despite this, the majority of student athletes do not receive a salary, and the question of whether universities should pay them directly remains controversial.

Student-athletes can receive gifts from boosters

The topic of whether universities can pay student athletes has been a subject of debate for many years. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA could not restrict colleges from offering student athletes "education-related benefits". This was a major development in the case for financial compensation for student athletes.

Following this, the NCAA issued an interim policy, allowing student-athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) but not to earn a salary. This policy will remain in place until a more permanent solution is found in conjunction with Congress.

As a result of this ruling, student-athletes can now accept money and gifts from boosters, usually, longtime donors, or local businessmen with ties to a university. Boosters can provide student-athletes with gifts such as PlayStations, tablets, recliners, and game consoles. Each participant is allowed to bring home the NCAA limit of $550 in bowl game gifts, which can be stretched by bowl committees through bulk-purchase pricing.

However, it is important to note that there are still restrictions on what boosters can provide to student-athletes. For example, boosters are prohibited from providing transportation, loans, use of personal property, cash, or credit cards. Additionally, boosters cannot provide free or reduced-cost entertainment, services, products, or lodging.

The NCAA's settlement, which must be approved by a federal judge, would allow schools to pay athletes directly, but it is not mandatory. This proposed settlement has two parts: the first part would distribute $2.75 billion to athletes who competed before July 2021, and the second part would create a future revenue-sharing model where schools could distribute around $20 million per year directly to athletes.

They can make deals with companies to use their names, images and likenesses

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA violated antitrust laws by overly restricting compensation. In response, the NCAA implemented an interim policy allowing college athletes to benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). This means that athletes can make deals with companies to use their names, images, and likenesses for commercial purposes, such as endorsements.

NIL deals allow athletes to be compensated for the use of their names, images, and likenesses through marketing and promotional endeavours. This can include autograph signings, product endorsements, social media posts, and more. For example, athletes can sign autographs and memorabilia, make personal appearances, and take on affiliate or ambassador roles.

There are some limitations to NIL deals. For instance, most state laws and school policies prohibit student-athletes from endorsing certain products, such as alcohol, tobacco, or gambling products. Additionally, NIL deals cannot be used as a recruiting inducement or be tied to an athlete's performance or achievement.

The rise of social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok has paved the way for athletes to create their own personal brands and connect with a broad audience. This has led to athletes being able to monetise their online presence and influence through brand partnerships and promotions.

While the NIL policy has opened up new opportunities for athletes to earn income, it is important to note that the rules and regulations surrounding NIL can vary by state and individual colleges. As such, athletes must carefully navigate state laws and college rules when pursuing NIL deals.

They can endorse products

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA violated antitrust laws with its rules around compensation, holding that the NCAA could no longer "limit education-related compensation or benefits" for Division I football and basketball players. In response, the NCAA released an interim policy allowing college athletes to benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). This means that student-athletes can now endorse products.

The NIL policy provides the opportunity for players to profit off their personal brand through social media and endorsement deals. For example, they can make deals with companies to use their names, images, and likenesses; and endorse products. This has been further supported by state legislation, with California being the first U.S. state to give college athletes the opportunity to earn endorsement money, followed by New Jersey, which introduced the "New Jersey Fair Play Act". Similar bills were also under consideration in Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Minnesota.

The NIL policy has been praised by many, including Los Angeles Lakers star LeBron James, who described it as "a beautiful day for all college athletes". However, some universities, such as Brigham Young University, have expressed concerns about the types of products their student-athletes might endorse. NCAA President Mark Emmert has stated that policies under review and legislative proposals have tried to identify product categories, such as alcohol, tobacco, and gambling, that either the law or schools could prevent college athletes from endorsing.

While the NIL policy is a step forward for college athlete compensation, it is important to note that it does not require schools to pay athletes directly. The proposed settlement between the NCAA and the five biggest conferences in 2024 would allow schools to pay athletes in the future, but it would not be mandatory.

They can receive athletic scholarships

Universities cannot pay student athletes a salary, but they can provide athletic scholarships. These scholarships can cover part of a student's tuition or be a full-tuition scholarship, and may also cover room and board. According to the NCAA, NCAA athletes participating in Division I and Division II sports receive $2.9 billion in athletic scholarships yearly. However, the average amount of an athletic scholarship is $18,000, which is only a small fraction of tuition for private universities or out-of-state tuition for public universities.

Student-athletes in "head count" sports such as Division I football, Division I men's basketball, and Division I women's basketball often receive full scholarships that cover tuition and fees. Other student-athletes in "equivalency sports" receive a fraction of the total scholarship amount, which is allocated to their coach's discretion. This means that scholarships are divided among players as the coach sees fit. Overall, only 1% of student-athletes receive full-tuition scholarships.

Athletic scholarships are offered to talented student-athletes to help cover the cost of attendance at a university. These scholarships can significantly impact an athlete's ability to play collegiate sports.

They can receive compensation via booster gifts

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has long held a firm stance against student-athlete compensation, seeking to preserve a spirit of "amateurism" in college sports. However, recent developments have challenged this position. In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA could not restrict colleges from providing "education-related benefits" to student athletes. This ruling opened the door for athletes to receive gifts from boosters, which are typically defined as longtime donors or local businessmen with ties to a university.

Following the Supreme Court decision, the NCAA issued an interim policy allowing student-athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). This policy permits athletes to make deals with companies, endorse products, and accept money from boosters. While the NCAA's interim policy is a step forward, it does not allow athletes to earn a salary. The organisation is working with Congress to find a more permanent solution that balances the interests of all stakeholders.

The NCAA's settlement of a class-action antitrust lawsuit in 2024 further advanced the case for student-athlete compensation. The settlement included a payout of nearly $2.8 billion to current and former student-athletes and allowed schools to pay athletes directly in the future. However, it is important to note that the settlement does not require schools to make these payments.

The debate surrounding student-athlete compensation continues, with arguments for and against. Supporters of compensation highlight the significant time commitment required by college sports, which can impact athletes' academic performance and future career prospects. They also point to the billions of dollars in revenue generated by college sports, arguing that athletes deserve a larger share of these earnings. On the other hand, opponents of compensation argue that existing scholarships already provide adequate compensation and that paying athletes could create a financial strain on colleges and universities.

While the discussion on direct compensation from universities to athletes continues, the current landscape allows student athletes to receive compensation via booster gifts. This compensation takes the form of endorsements, sponsorships, and other benefits that can provide financial support for student athletes while navigating the demands of college sports and academics.

Frequently asked questions