The question of whether or not to pay college athletes has risen again recently, but as always, the answer to this sporadic, and at times controversial proposal, is no.
It’s true that college athletes who play football and men’s basketball generate a lot of money for universities that either have successful programs or play in Bowl Championship Series conferences. It’s also true that many top college football and men’s basketball coaches earn seven-figure annual salaries for heading these successful programs. Knowing this, it might seem like the logical move would be to pay the athletes who help generate millions of dollars per year for these schools, but it isn’t that easy.
Many college athletes who are on scholarships are already being paid. In addition to having their education paid for by the school ”“ which can be as much as $50,000 per year depending on the institution ”“ players are receiving free room and board, tutoring, money for books, access to some of the most elite fitness training and physical therapy, and exposure that could help them become a professional athlete. The training and therapy alone would be expensive if the players were trying to pay for it themselves, but they get it for free because they play a sport for the school.
College athletics is also about amateur competition, but yes, we understand that some schools pay their players against the National College Athletic Association’s rules. If a school is caught for this, the NCAA severely penalizes the institution, but it is a chance some colleges are willing to take in order to become a winning team.
Paying players is also a question of fairness. In college basketball, for example, a team carries 12-14 players. Of these players, only a few typically are the stars of the team and have a chance to make it to the National Basketball Association. Out of the more than 80 players on a football team, only a handful of those young men really stand out, which in turn allows the university to increase its ticket prices and generate merchandising sales.
Do all of the players get paid, regardless of playing time, or just those athletes that quantifiably earn the institution money?
The question of fairness also comes into play with regard to other athletic programs. If basketball and football players are going to be paid, then what about the women’s swim team members, baseball team, gymnastics teams, or track and field athletes? How would compensation be determined and how would that eventually impact a university’s sports offerings?
Schools with smaller athletic budgets could also be forced to compete with wealthier schools to attract the same caliber of athletes to their institutions, and therefore pay them more money or match offers. Will sports agents be allowed to negotiate deals? The questions can go on and on, and there isn’t a simple answer other than no college athlete should be paid a salary.
College athletes who do generate money through merchandising of their jerseys should receive some percentage of those sales. That is only fair. If a university or the NCAA is allowed to make money off of the players’ names, then those players should receive a cut since it is their celebrity that is being bought.
It’s a dizzying prospect to think about paying college athletes and the implementation of such a deal is not simple or easy.
The answer to the question of paying these athletes outside of their scholarships and personal merchandising sales, however, is simple, and that answer is never.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Sports Editor Al Edwards on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
