
In the most recent fiscal year, the NCAA generated $1 billion off of unpaid labor in the form of student athletes. While some see full-ride scholarships as a justifiable form of payment, the recent Northwestern Football team's attempt to unionize has sparked conversation about the possible outcomes of student athletes having the right to form a union. This unionization would allow for the players to be seen as employees of the university, and thus they would be able to share the revenue that they are responsible for generating. With an increasingly growing work schedule, student athletes are facing many responsibilities, and the ability to form a union would ultimately change their experience as a student athletes. If given this privilege, what would be the possible effects of college athlete unionization? I will explain what effects student athlete unionization would have on the NCAA's policy on compensating student athletes outside of a scholarship.

The beginning stages of the discussion for student athletes to be able to unionize began with a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board. "The ruling found that athletics scholarships are a form of compensation for services performed. It also found that, because of the significant time commitment required by football programs, the economic relationship that players have with their university, and the control the institution has over their schedules, football players are employees of the university" (Wolverton 1). This statement was quickly appealed by Northwestern University, as they have never changed their view that they are students first and athletes second. When at the hearing, Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter was passionate about his team's rights, "He [Colter] exchanged sharp words with Northwestern's lawyers, arguing that even at his elite university, football was essentially a full-time job, requiring a commitment of up to 60 hours a week" (Wolverton 2). Due to his role as starting quarterback, as well as four prior years of experience, Colter is able to understand the toll it takes on the student athletes. When laying out the terms for their union, Colter was less concerned with a physical paycheck, but instead advocates better education benefits. The players have a difficult time balancing their practice and academic schedules, which calls for enhanced academic benefits, such as a guaranteed 4-year scholarship.  At The University of North Carolina, there were special classes only available to student athletes that required little attendance, and had the grade centered on a final paper, which was always lightly graded. Bob DeMars understands why education benefits change under a union, saying, "If universities are going to let kids into the system who read at an elementary level, they should be spending 60 hours a week on school and 20 on football, not the other way around"(Wolverton 1). This statement also questions whether or not they are students first, as he calls out universities that prioritize athletics. DeMars played football at the University of Southern California, and understands that student athletes at prestigious academic and athletic programs have a schedule that is focused on athletics opposed to academics. If universities refuse to change the academic benefits for students, the right to form a union would help specific student athletes to make a change and pursue their goal of a complete college education. 

Under the terms of a union, an additional perk available to the student athletes is the right to negotiate their own wages. Although a scholarship carries a value of over a hundred thousand dollars, there is still an argument that there is room to receive further compensation. The problem is addressed by Theodore Ross, who is experienced in the relationship between money and college sports, who said, "The billion-dollar business ventures currently referred to as College Football and College Basketball have come under increased scrutiny of late, by a variety of actors, judicial, administrative, journalistic, and otherwise. The games and their related by-products -- ESPN, video games, tight-fitting workout clothes, electrolyte-supplementing beverages -- constitute a system of human resource extraction, one in which already wealthy universities derive enormous benefit from young men who don't share in the riches they create" (Ross 1). EA Sports recently stopped producing College Football and Basketball video games, as that was a direct example of making money off of certain student athletes. If student athletes are seen as a source of revenue, providing them a share of their profits can be seen as justifiable. 

Following the halt in production of college sporting video games, it becomes easier to question if these student athletes are actually being exploited. Although a full ride scholarship is a large sum of money that is a reward for their hard work, it is still questionable for the NCAA and other universities to profit the additional millions in revenue. The Congressional Digest, when speaking about the Northwestern unionization trials said, "the current system is exploitative, and given the financial benefits of the football program, the players' relationship to the university is primarily an economic one, distinct from their education. They argue that student-athletes need guarantees regarding their health, living expenses, and academic and career opportunities" (Congressional digest 1). In a study from 2007-2010, black athletes represented 57% of college football players, and 65% of college basketball players. Darron Smith, an advocate for black athletes writes, "It is obvious to the casual observer that the bulk of young men who entertain and thrill fans in these most high-profile sports happen to be African-American. These students, most of them from urban landscapes, stand to gain the most from reform"(Smith 1). Urban black athletes are very common in Division 1 sports, and an increased payment for them under a union labor would help them be able to travel home, as well as have spending money for necessary goods. If a student athlete is being featured in video games, endorsing brands, and having money made off of the selling of their jersey number; the ability to make money off of self-endorsement rightfully becomes possible under a union. 

With the introduction of student athlete unions, the main goal of college athletics for universities is still to compete, however this can be undermined under a new system. Scholarships are available for schools to be able to recruit the best athletes they can to play for their schools, and this results in an increasingly large battle for the best high school prospects. If recruiting becomes money based it will end up hurting the schools that have less successful athletic teams. Wolverton analyzes what occurs if recruiting becomes money based, "Not every college would be able to afford to compete on the open market. Think USC versus San Diego State University. The Trojans are a national brand as well as a national power; an expensive private school, with wealthy alumni and boosters, and an iconic sports institution that people around the country support by buying t-shirts, caps, foam fingers, and tiny replica football helmets. The Aztecs possess few of these attributes and wouldn't necessarily have the money to stay in the big-time game."(Ross). Under this circumstance, the larger schools that belong to Power 5 sporting conferences (ACC, SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12) would have the necessary boosters and alumni support in order to out-recruit the smaller sized programs that lack the necessary funding. The effect is that the powerful schools continue to land the best players, and the rest of schools struggle to fight in a money-driven, open market for players who are seeking to become part of an elite program. This lack of money could force schools to decide to drop down to a Division two level, as economist Andrew Zimbalist says, "You'd have teams that fail and go under"(Wolverton 1). Zimbalist continues to analyze the effects of unionization, and concludes that less student athletes would be offered any form of scholarship. This shows a negative effect of student athlete union, as the opportunity for a young athlete able to earn a scholarship and compete at the college level would drop. The NCAA is rigid on its opinion for student athlete compensation, and does whatever it can in order to protect the educational experience of the athletes. The NCAA counters pro-unionization advocates by explaining, "Participation in college sports is, after all, voluntary. They maintain that athletic scholarships have allowed many who would not otherwise have been able to afford college to get a quality education"(Digest 1). Student athlete unions have negative effects that counter the positives, and if the result is a lower rate of competition, the NCAA will stand ground on their opinion. Although urban athletes don't make money off of their labor, they are given an opportunity that may have been unreasonable otherwise. The NCAA argues unionization by saying that the decision of which school to compete at a college level should be based on an educational standpoint, and not on how much money the school can grant you. 

Student athletes have a reasonable case to argue, as they are responsible for the millions of dollars generated due to their hard work, and it can be seen as fair for them to get a share of it. Under the grounds of a union, the industry of college athletics is affected, as smaller schools without funding get bullied by the larger, more recognizable programs. The integrity of the student athletes comes into question, as their collegiate decision basis is meant to be the best combination of athletics and academics, and the NCAA fears that if money is involved it will lead to the decision being made for the wrong reasons. Student athletes are generating more money each year, as the introduction of the College Football Playoffs, as well as the perennially watched March Madness tournament are becoming even more popular. The fight for unionization is reasonable, but so long as the student athletes are receiving a free education while utilizing top-notch facilities, the system in place will become difficult to change. 

