
In 2016 alone, the NCAA incurred 740 million dollars. Currently the richest college football team in the nation is the Texas Longhorns valued at 152 million dollars. During the 2011 March Madness college basketball tournament, advertisement costs totaled 1,040.7 million dollars. (Statista). These are some of the incomprehensible fiscal facts behind college sports and the money it generates. It is indisputable that college sports are a top priority for many Americans. However, for the money being produced, who is reaping the benefits? Nick Saban, the head coach of the Alabama Crimson Tide football team earned $7,087,481 in his 2015 campaign. (Wire). One may question if this substantial salary is being distributed fairly. What about the players? Should their blood, sweat, tears, and sacrifice go unrewarded? Jason Whitlock, a former Division I football player feels that college athletes are already granted enough reimbursements: "College athletes do not need movie and laundry money. They need to be slapped back into reality. People need to tell them just how good they have got it. We need to stress to them that the educational opportunity they have been afforded is more valuable than the "pocket money." (Whitlock 2). 

However, other sports followers differ in opinion. Michael Wilbon, a well known ESPN reporter believes that not paying student athletes may be an injustice. Wilbon writes, "The players have become employees of the universities and conferences as much as students -- employees with no compensation, which not only violates common decency but perhaps even the law." (Wilbon). College athletes provide a service to their school, honor their family name, and captivate the nation-wide audience every season. However, the solution is not giving paid compensation. College athletes should not be paid because of the already existing benefits: discounted tuition, private tutors, state of the art training facilities/medical care, as well as free professional development. In the future, if college athletes were to be paid, there would be no way of distributing funds equally to Division II and III schools whose fiscal production is not even comparable to that of Division I programs. Certain laws and regulations would be broken if college athletes were to be paid and lawsuits would follow. Title IX is an extensive federal law that has been around for 44 years that would prohibit paying athletes through discrimination by sport. This is a nation wide issue that contains a lot of controversy and could drastically change the college admission process, and could cause education to take a back seat to physical fitness and athletic ability during youth years.  

Americans have declared college sports as practically a religion in some parts of the country. However, there is an undeniable difference between the athletics of Division I and that of Divisions II and III. 53% of the NCAA's revenue goes to Division I schools while only 7% goes to both Division II and III schools. (Statistic Brain). Also, NCAA rules prohibit Division III schools from awarding athletic scholarships. (O'Shaugnessy 1). This current methodology for distributing funds accrued by the NCAA is unethical. Obviously, it is known that Division I schools bring in more money, but to be this lop sided is unfair to the student athletes competing at the Division II and III level. In fact, this injustice actually violates Title IX. Title IX is a comprehensive federal law, signed by Richard Nixon in 1972, that prohibits discrimination in any federally funded education program or activity (Jones). In addition to creating equality for all Divisions of college athletics, there can be no discrimination by sport under Title IX. Therefore, if football and men's basketball players were to be given a paid salary, then the swimming and field hockey athletes would also have to be compensated equally. Although, I still believe that college athletes should not be given paid compensation, more can be done to ensure that athletes in all three divisions are treated equally. There is a lot of gray area when it comes to paying college athletes. And those who are in favor of paying college athletes need to recognize that there is not a clear cut solution to this controversial topic. 

In addition to the inequality between the NCAA divisions, the dispersion of money in college athletics is somewhat flawed. The fact that coaches, television companies, universities, and the NCAA are practically stealing the profits away from students in need of financial aid is totally irrational. College athletes should not receive a direct deposit of money into their bank account, but placing more scholarship money and discounted tuition will help to show the value that these competitors bring to their respective schools. Only 53% of all Division I student-athletes receive some level of athletics aid. (NCAA Recruiting Facts). Imagine the families that could be spared from debt and college loans if their son or daughter proved to be a prized money-maker for a university. Diminishing debt for college graduates would help to stabilize the economy and help to create an easier transition for them into the real world. This would eliminate any dispute over whether universities should grant salaries to players while simultaneously helping them and their families get rewarded for exceptional talent in a field of athletics. 

If more scholarships were to be given, there would have to be some protection against losing them. In today's world injuries can strip the scholarship funds away from student athletes. These tragedies happen every year, in every sport. Physical ailments leave families with catastrophic medical bills as well as full tuition costs due to the loss of scholarship. The risk that these athletes take is huge and sometimes can severely cause debt and bankruptcy. A New York Times article gave a voice to some of these athletes who have been left twisting in the wind with financial problems that they never expected to have. "Kyle Hardrick lost his basketball scholarship at Oklahoma after he tore his meniscus. Jason Whitehead nearly lost his football scholarship at Ohio University after he injured his neck. Stanley Doughty left South Carolina only to discover he had a serious spine injury that ended his N.F.L. career after his first physical." (Strauss 2). The Kyle Hardrick story is very intriguing. Kyle committed to Oklahoma when he was just 14 years old. After a teammate landed on his legs in practice, Kyle injured his right knee. After Kyle met with team doctors, he was assured that it was nothing serious, and that he would be able to play again with physical therapy. Two years later, results of a magnetic resonance imaging test on his knee revealed that Kyle had suffered a torn meniscus. Oklahoma refused to pay for the surgery and the Hardrick family was forced to use their own insurance. The Oklahoma basketball team deemed Kyle a medical liability and his scholarship was not renewed. Unable to pursue a life in basketball, Kyle Hardrick now works at Halliburton on an oil field. "He still has severe knee pain and is responsible for all of his medical costs." (Strauss 2). Everything changed in an instant for a talented young man with his sights set on NBA dreams. These heart wrenching stories are not rare and with the money that is being generated in college sports, there is no question that more can be done to prevent travesties like this from ever occurring again.

To get a better scope on just how college athletes are treated, I decided to interview a friend of mine from home who runs track and field at the Division I level for the University of South Carolina. Sarah Cooper is a freshman from Middletown, Delaware and was given a scholarship to compete at the college level for the Gamecocks. Sarah was given a "full ride" to attend USC and her and her family pay absolutely nothing for her college experience. Sarah explained to me the other benefits she enjoys. Her living conditions are very atypical when thinking about freshman dormitories. She stays in 650 Lincoln, a luxurious fully furnished apartment with her own bedroom, three other roommates and a kitchen. All athletes who attend USC are given the choice to live at 650 Lincoln for free or pay for off campus living after their freshman year. She is given a free meal plan where her and other athletes can go to the Dodie Academic Center for breakfast and dinner. The athletic program decides to give athletes this free meal plan to force them to eat healthier more nutritious foods. Athletes also must attend mandatory study halls with private tutors. Sarah meets with free private tutors every Sunday from 7 pm to 9 pm and every Monday through Wednesday from 8 pm to 10 pm to help her with her school work. In addition to these free services, Sarah receives a $420 check from the NCAA every month. This handout is meant to help student-athletes pay for "groceries, plane tickets home, gas money, or if they wanted to go to the mall or things like that." She explained to me that the size of this check varies by school. "It mainly depends on the location of the school and how many people attend it." According to her, University of Miami athletes receive roughly $900 a month because of the cost of living in Florida. When the team travels to track meets around the country, each player is given a "per diem." Per diem is an allotted amount of money that each player receives to pay for food while away from campus. This money comes from the university, not the NCAA and the budget varies for each sport. Players are also given leniency if an exam falls on the day of a meet as long as prior notice has been given. When asked if Sarah believed that she has been rewarded and treated fairly for her hard work as a student athlete at the University of South Carolina, Sarah said, "Most definitely...I have not had one professor that was uncooperative with my traveling schedule. Being a student athlete is most definitely a job and it is nice to know that when I "go to work" as an athlete, I can come back on campus to be a student. Everything is smooth. I do not see how anyone can say we are not being treated fairly here since we are most definitely well provided for, on both the student and the athlete side." After hearing from a direct source about the benefits that college athletes enjoy, one can only imagine what their life would be like if he or she competed at the Division I level of college athletics. 

Looking at this topic from a hypothetical view, what if we were to give salaries to college athletes? It would definitely create a much more competitive atmosphere in younger athletics. High school athletes would become selfish players in order to make the "greatest highlight tape of all time" in an attempt to shock big name universities to receive that sought after paycheck. Even in today's athletic process, some parents push their kids relentlessly. Imagine if a paycheck were to be received for outstanding athletic talent and physique. Parents would become overbearing on their children. Starting workout programs at a young age that may stunt the growth and hurt the development of kids. Because of this, kids hoping to simply try out a sport would be unable to because of the talent of their peers. Education would be left as a fall back plan, instead of a priority, to sports. Due to the competitive nature, kids would fear of "not being good enough" or "failing", if they are not given an offer from a top tier college. The backlash from non-athletes would also be well heard. Why should the middle line backer make money when the cellist, dancer, scientist, or aspiring doctor be left with minor scholarship aid or even full tuition? As stated earlier, lawsuits would become a nightmare for the NCAA and the universities themselves, if this plan was to come into fruition. I suppose parents of non-athletes would get their "lost" money back through filing for a violation of Title IX. Paying college athletes would be detrimental to the development of our youth. Teamwork and potential friendships would slowly become extinct in elementary and high school sports. Lawsuits and legal bouts would be very strenuous and greed would poison family morals. All in all, if college athletes were to be paid, the changes would ruin youth development, put pressure on families, and ultimately diminish the "for the love of the game" notion. 

College athletics have become a staple in American entertainment. Viewers from all over the country are captivated by the skill level and talent showcased every day of the year. The efforts put forth by these young men and women does not go unnoticed. But it seems even though the general public respects these athletes the NCAA, college coaches, television companies, and the universities themselves benefit the most. There are multiple problems with the current relationship between the authority figures, the NCAA and the universities, and the players themselves. Injuries can strip scholarship funding away from a player and force them and their families to pay exorbitant amounts of money. The NCAA, coaches of universities, and television companies are making far too much a profit, while that money could be used to provide more scholarship money and help to eradicate student loans. And if college athletes were to be given straight up paid compensation for their determination instead of scholarships, the backlash from families would be inconceivable. Expressing the worth of a student athlete by placing a dollar amount on him or her is not only unethical, it is immoral. College athletes mean so much to their universities and should be treated with dignity and respect. Having said this, student athletes do not have the hardest lives imaginable. Gathering from what track and field athlete Sarah Cooper said, she firmly believes that everything that can be done, is being done for her. The athletes themselves are the only ones who should argue if they should be paid or not. Why should the general public or news article authors be affected by this? The only problem that is occurring currently is the money being placed in the wrong hands. Since college athletics hold so much weight in the economy, altering the system could potentially improve it. All in all, we are talking about sports. Sports that the majority of the American population has at one time participated in. If we put this thought that "success is defined by money" in the heads of our youth, they would play the game in a different mindset. A mindset of greed and self-regard instead of having fun and bettering themselves. This horrifying notion takes away from what the message of athletics is. It hinders children from gaining valuable life lessons from sports. Shaping their character for the worse. That is why this controversial topic is so much more than "paying college athletes." This decision has the power to alter the minds and morals of our future leaders, doctors, businessmen, fathers and mothers. College athletes should not be granted paid compensation because it would take away from the true message behind the phrase "hard work pays off."

