The National Collegiate Athletic Association is the foremost authority on college athletics. Tracing its history back to the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, the organization has a long history of supporting reforms to sport arbitration and safety regulations, as well as promoting amateurism. Amateurism, as the NCAA has outlined on its website as, "a bedrock principle of college athletics ... " constitutes that a college athlete not receive contracts, salary, sponsorships, prize money, agent representation, etc., which is today's commercialized sports market, is outdated and ridiculous. 

The NCAA is now over 100 years old and it is time to evolve. College athletes, without a doubt, should be paid for the amount of money, interest, free advertising, reputation, etc., that they generate for their universities, the NCAA organization, and other business partners/sponsors involved in the distribution, broadcasting, syndication, licensing, trademarking, advertising, organizing, etc., of any NCAA sanctioned events. 

As athletes for a college or university at the NCAA Division 1, 2, or 3 levels, they are generally at the mercy of their sports schedule. Now, that may sound odd because they elected to play the sport at the next level, but not as a full time job commitment on top of school commitments. The work-school-life balance that this hectic schedule demands is far from balanced. Recently, many higher institutions of learning have come under scrutiny from the press based around policies like these that seem to shortcut and or try to get ahead of the competition, in the process, sacrificing scholastic integrity. 

For example, according to a recent law suit filed by two former athletes at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, student athletes were many times spending more than 40 hours practicing and preparing for sporting obligations every week, leaving them barely enough time to meet their school work obligations. The lawsuit also goes on to shed some light on an infamous practice assumed by the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill in regards to "paper classes" or classes that did not require attendance, but merely a final paper. These courses acted as funnel classes for athletes, as they required little effort or time to receive a passing grade, which ultimately had them feel, " ... deprived of a 'meaningful education' while representing the school on the field." 

Another instance in which students' commitments to their universities athletic teams is being recognized as a full time job is at Northwestern University. In 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that the Northwestern football players were in fact employees of the university and had the right to union representation. In the situation of the football players, it was uncovered that the players were facing a weekly workload of 50-60hrs a week until the beginning of the season, while trailing off to 40-50hrs a week during the regular season. Although the sport is seasonal, practice goes on all year around, dedicating at a minimum 15-20hrs a week to training during the off-season. 

On average, the NCAA makes about $1billion per year. The organization also has a lucrative 14-year agreement with CBS and Turning Broadcasting estimated at nearly $11billion. According to the Huffington Post's Senior Editor Maxwell Strachan, the organization generates 90% of its revenues, " ... from television and marketing rights fees." Needless to say, the organization is not hurting for money, which is quite curious since it is considered a "non-profit organization" per its website. 

Also, these numbers neglect to show the money that the NCAA generates for its sponsors and partners, which can be tallied up into the billions. It is important to reflect upon March Madness and how it has become somewhat of a religion for college basketball fans every year during the month of March. The reason March Madness is so exciting and entertaining is because of the athletes, not because of the NCAA, and they are not recompensed accordingly. Especially since it is currently March, the omniscience of this collegiate event can be stifling. Due to the overexposure of such an event from so much media coverage, it is hard to believe that these athletes are not receiving any compensation for the arguably physically perceivable amounts of money they are raking in for the Capitalist system pulling the marionette strings above them. 

In his 2001 law review from the Loyola Law School of Loyola Marymount University entitled, "Gettin' Played: How the Video Game Industry Violates College Athletes' Rights of Publicity by Not Paying for Their Likenesses," Matthew Matzkin argues the violations of college athletes rights in the age of digital media. His argument stems around the video-gaming industry, which, as he states, " ... is a lucrative enterprise, particularly as the games' graphics, sound and playability continue to improve with advances in technology."

This emergence in technology coupled with the NCAA's strict adherence to its amateurism policy allows video game producers to use star athletes without having to pay for rights to use their name, number, statistics, etc. Since the NCAA prohibits the athletes from selling the rights to their names and images, the video game industry more or less gets free sponsorship. Imagine if Tiger Woods had to do all of his Nike endorsements for free. Logically, the quality, the number of endorsements/commercial appearances and the Tiger Woods x Nike brand image would be a lot less. There is no incentive to do endorsements or sponsorships like this for free because it is at total benefit for the brand, much like the unpaid college athletes are robbed of their benefit from the NCAA, media, video game industry, etc.

As the website for the NCAA states, 90% of their revenues go straight back to the athletes. But is this figure accurate? What this number tends to ignore is the fact that these profits are not fairly distributed to the athletes. Coaches and athletic staffs reap the rewards of their athlete harvest before the money is even reinvested into the athletes and the school. 

This is so obvious in the example of the University of Alabama. A school that generates, as of 2014, more revenues from its football program than every NHL team playing in the National Hockey League. The NHL, at the time, had a current minimum salary of $550,000, and although hockey teams are smaller than football teams, at least the athletes are paid in respect to their performance. There is also a relationship between revenues generated by the athletes and their compensation as far the NHL is concerned.

The last example of Alabama illuminates the final point in regards to college athletes being compensated for their participation as a member of a college athletic team. As previously stated, the University of Alabama Crimson Tide makes an unfathomable amount of money that is clearly not being invested back into the students. The amount of money being generated is so significant and should be going back into enriching the education of the athletes and students further, but it is clear that this is not the case. With revenues surpassing $150million in 2015, one would be interested in knowing why the academics at Alabama are not more on par with universities performing at a higher academic echelon. An example of this would be a school like the University of Michigan, which actually generated $157million in revenues in 2015, and is generally considered to be a more rigorous and prestigious academic institution than the University of Alabama. 

Instead, programs that generate huge sums of money are taking this money and reinvesting first and foremost into staffing, facilities, and recruiting. They are also not only receiving the money from the NCAA partnerships, but also student contributions as a part of tuition expenses. According to The Washington Post, in 2014 student fees as meant for sports totaled $114million dollars. The coaches for these programs are also compensated more than generously for their experience and conventional wisdom. Many well-known coaches that have established winning programs can expect to make anywhere from $3-6million per year or per contract. Coach Mike Krzyzewski of "Coach K" of Duke's legendary basketball team, for instance, rakes in an average of $6million a year as a salary. 

It seems almost like the athlete's are being tricked. Everyone else at this point is profiting off of them, while they are confined to the NCAA's rules on amateurism. Especially with the emergence of technology like video games and photo/video licensing, it will continue to become a hotly contested battle that will blur lines of acceptance for athletes that may appear to break the rules down the line if they are not amended. If a self-proclaimed "non-profit organization" is profiting to the tune of $11billion on the backs of athletes that are generally exploited for all their time & energy, then there needs to be a change to the current system. They are a big business, and should thus be held to compensating their laborers just like every other business. 

The deal that the NCAA made with CBS/Turner Sports for nearly $11billion dollars for just three weekends per year until 2024 also drew criticism from industry experts. Michael Wilbon, a popular sport's analyst and commentator, echoes a similar sentiment of disbelief as to how college athletes generating money are not being remunerated. In his 2011 article published by ESPN titled, "College Athletes Deserve To Be Paid," Wilbon explains why he has evolved on the issue of paying college athletes. Formerly, the analyst stated that he would, "argue vehemently against paying college athletes. Tuition, room, board and books were compensation enough." Wilbon changed his tune on the 

On the topic of the NCAA's lucrative media deals, he asserts that, "What if people in the business of money took $1.3 billion off the top, invested it, sheltered it and made it available to provide a stipend to college athletes, how could anybody stand on principal and argue against paying the people who make the events possible in the first place?" He next qualifies that he is in no way trying to distribute the funds fairly to all athletes, but that athletes that are generating millions and millions of dollars, like those in the football and basketball programs at successful institutions of higher learning. 

Wilbon continues to argue that being fair to all athletes in paying them equally is a fundamental fallacy that underscores the system of Capitalism that dominates the world economy. In support of this, he qualifies that, "Not everything is equal, not everything is fair. The most distinguished professor at the University of Alabama won't make $5.9 million in his entire tenure in Tuscaloosa; Nick Saban will make that this year." This assertion illuminates the apparent hypocrisy of the NCAA in its denial to pay the people that are, in essence, generating all of the organization's profits. By rejecting the capitalist ideal of paying for a product or service in an ever-changing, modern world that does not transcribe to the same by-laws as the world that this organization was born into, they are essentially just waiting on a large, fragmented group of athletes to unionize.

Although it would be a serious stretch to profess to be a business expert, I cannot imagine that the NCAA's business strategy of staying stagnant and apparently reactive on this issue will be beneficial to their organization. As the aforementioned ruling in favor of the Northwestern University football players as being recognized as employees of the school with the right to union representation set the precedent, the fact that the NCAA is not even at least entertaining the prospect of amending its outdated principles is curious. It seems to go without saying that being proactive rather than reactive, especially in a business context, is always better when it comes having to analyze, engage and diffuse and/or augment a threat/opportunity to the enterprise. 

Many times athletes have overly demanding schedules that impede on their education process and effect their performance and participation on the field. These demanding schedules, forced upon them by their respective academic institutions, constitute that student athletes work the same if not more time than is expected for a full-time position, but are not compensated accordingly. Secondly, the athletes generating the significant cash flows for their schools are not receiving that money directly reinvested back into the programs. It has become commonplace for successful athletic programs to invest funds generated by the athletics back into staffing, facilities and recruitment, first and foremost before the athletes. Finally, the NCAA generates nearly $1billion in profits per year for a "not-for-profit organization" and has signed a near $11billion media license for 14 years with CBS/Turner Broadcasting, which needless to say indicates that the NCAA is not in financial trouble by any means. 

While the nascence of the NCAA was to promote amateurism, the NCAA of today; however, is a far differently constructed organization. As a big business disguised as a governing body of college athletics, it is now time to share the wealth with college athletes. This essay explores the claim that college athletes should be compensated for their time, energy and sacrifice that they offer up in the name of college athletics and big business. 

