Student-Athletes: Pay And Integrity In University Sports

Intercollegiate sports have long been a part of what makes college appealing, and they also bring in a lot of money for colleges. In 2021, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the largest college sports organization in the United States, generated \$18.9 billion in revenue. Despite this, college athletes have never been paid, and many see the amateur ideal as an excuse used by big-time college sports programs to avoid sharing the revenue with the athletes. This has sparked a debate about whether college athletes should be paid, with arguments for and against.

Paying student athletes may negatively affect their education and future careers

Secondly, paying student athletes may result in additional costs for colleges and universities. Only a few sports, such as men's basketball, women's basketball, and gridiron football, generate a profit for educational institutions. Therefore, funding for athlete salaries would have to come from other areas of the budget, potentially leading to the elimination of less popular sports from athletics programs.

Thirdly, paying student athletes may not necessarily improve their quality of life or financial situation. Colleges and universities already exercise a significant level of control over the schedules of student athletes, and this could increase if they are considered employees. Student athletes may have even less free time to engage in typical college experiences and could face greater pressure to perform athletically.

Furthermore, paying student athletes may negatively impact their brand deals and sponsorship opportunities. Institutions may exert more control over their name, image, and likeness for marketing purposes, potentially limiting athletes' access to brand partnerships and diminishing interest from companies. This could ultimately stifle the earning potential of student athletes.

Finally, paying student athletes does not address the underlying issue of the broken amateur sports system in the United States. The focus should be on creating a true amateur or minor league system that feeds into professional sports, rather than solely on financial compensation for student athletes.

Student athletes are often valued at over $1 million but live below the poverty line

The National College Players Association (NCPA) and Drexel University conducted a joint study titled "The Price of Poverty in Big-Time College Sport," which estimated the fair market value of the average Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) football and basketball players to be $120,048 and $265,027, respectively. The study also found that these athletes often face scholarship shortfalls, with out-of-pocket expenses averaging $3,222 per player during the 2010-11 school year. As a result, 85% of players living on campus and 86% living off-campus fall below the federal poverty line.

Another study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that the top college football positions, such as quarterback and wide receiver, were worth $2.4 million and $1.3 million per year, respectively. Starting men's basketball players at Power Five schools were valued between $800,000 and $1.2 million annually. Despite their high value, college athletes often struggle financially due to the scholarship shortfalls and the cost of living.

The issue of poverty among college athletes is further exacerbated by the fact that they are not allowed to seek additional income through endorsements or other commercial opportunities. This restriction has led to the creation of a black market, as noted by the NCPA and Drexel University study, which has been a contributing factor to the scandals that have plagued college sports. The NCAA's strict amateurism rules have been blamed for driving athletes to engage in unethical and illegal activities to supplement their income.

The financial struggles of college athletes are particularly concerning given the physical risks they take by participating in sports. They put their bodies and future careers on the line, often receiving inadequate support for sports-related injuries. The NCAA does not mandate insurance coverage for athletes and allows schools to cancel scholarships due to injuries. This leaves many athletes with significant medical expenses and no means to continue their education.

The disparity between the value generated by college athletes and their compensation has led to growing calls for reform. Advocates for change argue that college athletes should be allowed to earn money from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). They propose that athletes should receive a portion of the revenue they help generate, similar to professional athletes in the NFL and NBA. Additionally, there are suggestions to adopt the Olympic amateur model, which allows for endorsement deals and autograph signings.

While there are concerns about the potential impact of paying college athletes on the integrity of intercollegiate sports and the finances of athletic departments, the current system has been criticized as exploitative and unfair. The debate continues as stakeholders weigh the benefits of maintaining the amateur status quo against the need to provide fair compensation and protect the rights of student athletes.

Scholarships are fair compensation for student athletes

Scholarships are a fair form of compensation for student athletes, especially when considering the financial situation of athletic departments. According to the NCAA, the organisation provides over $3.6 billion in athletic scholarships each year to more than 180,000 student-athletes. This equates to around $20,000 per student per year, which is generous when compared to the average total cost of public college, which is $17,797 for tuition, fees, room and board.

Athletic scholarships are intended to compensate athletes for their work and achievements. They cover tuition and fees, course-related books, room, board and sometimes living expenses. The majority of college athletic programs do not generate enough income to cover their expenses, with the collective expenses of the Power Five schools exceeding revenue by $7 million in 2019. If student-athletes were paid a salary on top of scholarships, it could put a strain on colleges and universities, and many would have to offer fewer scholarships.

Additionally, if student-athletes were paid, it could limit the playing field to elite universities with large budgets. This could create an uneven playing field, with a handful of powerful programs gaining an advantage in the competition for athletic talent simply because they can afford to pay salaries.

Furthermore, the majority of student-athletes will not go on to play professionally. Therefore, it is more prudent for them to focus on their education as compensation. Data shows that college graduates who participated in NCAA athletics experienced positive long-term life outcomes at greater rates than non-athletes. These outcomes include higher rates of graduation within four years, agreement that college was worth the cost, obtaining an advanced degree, having a "good" job after graduation, and thriving at the highest levels.

In conclusion, scholarships provide fair financial compensation for student-athletes, help athletic departments stay afloat, and encourage students to prioritise their education, which can lead to better long-term outcomes.

Paying student athletes may threaten the integrity of amateur sports

Secondly, the essence of college sports could be lost as the introduction of payment structures may shift the focus from education and personal growth to chasing financial gain. The spirit of competition and the thrill of hard-fought battles that keep fans on the edge of their seats may be compromised. Amateurism fosters a level playing field, and payment could widen the gap between well-funded and struggling athletic programs, resulting in predictable competitions that lack excitement and unpredictability.

Thirdly, paying student athletes may have financial implications for universities and their athletic departments. Universities may have to divert funds from other vital programs and services, impacting the quality of education and resources for non-athlete students. Additionally, athletic departments under pressure to generate more revenue may prioritise winning over education, putting immense pressure on athletes to perform.

Finally, paying college athletes may harm their overall college experience. The introduction of a salary may shift their focus from academics, social life, and personal growth to financial gain. The camaraderie and bonds formed between college athletes may be affected as the pursuit of money could create rifts between athletes and their non-athlete peers. Therefore, paying student athletes may threaten the integrity of amateur sports by potentially impacting legal compliance, altering the nature of competition, causing financial strain, and detracting from the holistic college experience.

Student athletes bring in billions of dollars for colleges and universities

Intercollegiate sports have long been a part of what makes college appealing. Athletics programs bring in a lot of money for some colleges. In 2021, the largest college sports organization in the United States, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), generated $18.9 billion in revenue. College athletes, on the other hand, have never been paid since collegiate sports competitions were organized. Many people see the amateur ideal as an excuse used by big-time college sports programs to avoid sharing the revenue generated with the athletes themselves.

Being an athlete can be considered a full-time occupation, as students spend a lot of time and effort fulfilling their athletic duties. In 2020, there were 504,619 student-athletes in the NCAA. These athletes are full-time or part-time students who also participate in their school's organized and competitive athletic programs. They must enroll in and attend college-sponsored courses in addition to their athletic responsibilities.

College athletes receive various forms of financial and non-monetary support from their colleges. They may be eligible for athletic scholarships to help pay for tuition, books, and other expenses. NCAA Division I and II schools provide more than $3.7 billion in athletic scholarships annually. However, athletic scholarships do not cover all of a student's expenses, and athletes often have to work outside of sports and academics to make ends meet.

The NCAA and other sports governing organizations regulate the majority of these scholarships and set minimum requirements for each scholarship, such as GPAs and standardized test scores. These organizations also determine the amount of each scholarship and the number of student-athletes eligible to receive it. While athletic scholarships are beneficial for students, they also come with certain restrictions. For example, if a scholarship is not renewed, the student-athlete becomes responsible for covering their tuition and other costs. Additionally, athletic scholarships do not always cover sports-related injuries, and there is currently no standardized healthcare coverage for student-athletes.

Despite the high earnings generated by college sports, college athletes have been excluded from this profitable industry. However, recent changes in governing body rulings have allowed college athletes to receive compensation for their name, image, and likeness (NIL). This has opened up opportunities for athletes to make deals with companies, endorse products, and accept money from boosters.

While the debate about paying college athletes continues, it is clear that intercollegiate sports play a significant role in the finances of many colleges and universities. The popularity of college sports has created a lucrative industry that generates billions of dollars. However, the question remains whether the athletes themselves should receive a larger share of the revenue they help to generate.

Frequently asked questions