Over the past few decades, collegiate athletics have gained immense popularity across the United States.  Whether it is football, basketball, or hockey, intercollegiate sports have brought in a surplus of revenue to their respective universities, as well as increasing the excellence of the college’s reputation. For example, in a study conducted by the Orlando Sentinel, it was estimated that the University of Texas’s athletic program had the highest revenue of any other university at $120,288,370.  Yet, even with this large sum of money, no college athlete is legally allowed to be compensated for their work. According to NCAA rules, “you are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever received payment, or a promise of payment, for competing in that sport.” Due to this law, not only are college athletes having difficulty in paying off their college tuition, but they are now being paid under the table, similar to a black market.  These amateur athletes have no incentive to stay in college and finish their respective degrees, as many cannot afford to pay for the continuing rise in tuition year after year.  While many argue that college athletes should not be paid, because they are just amateurs representing their schools, I argue that athletes must be able to receive a form of payment to keep the legitimacy of college athletics.

Student athletes should be compensated for their work, as they are the sole reason for the athletic program’s surplus in revenue.  These athletes are working hard and bringing in thousands of dollars’ worth of revenue to the university every day, yet are not rewarded monetarily. These athletes are working for the schools and are doing a service for the college that seems to go unnoticed.  This lack of pay is not seen anywhere else in the American workplace and should not be allowed for these athletes.  Some even argue that college athletes are being exploited by their schools, which make millions of dollars off of intercollegiate athletics.  Colleges are using these athletes to boost their respective reputations and bring in revenue while not compensating these athletes for their work. Non-collegiate athletes are paid, so why should not college athletes be paid as well?  Some critics may argue that these student-athletes are amateurs, and if paid then they become professional athletes.  This statement can be easily disproved, because “amateur” is a very broad and controversial term.  Hockey players a part of the AHL (Amateur Hockey League) are considered to be amateurs but are compensated for their work.

Defining college athletes as amateurs creates another problem. In addition to not being paid by the university, athletes cannot promote themselves.  The NCAA states “student-athletes shall be amateurs…and should be protected from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises.”  However, with this statement it seems that colleges and universities “are the entity that exploits.”   In 2000, due to the increasing cost of education, the NCAA “approved student-athletes’ employment in jobs paying up to $2,000 during a school year; the income can address educational expenses.”    However, not only does $2,000 barley cover educational costs, especially if not on scholarship, but the NCAA is not allowing student athletes to promote themselves.  Also, with all the time practicing and working in the classroom, how many athletes have time to get a job?  In reality, they are already working by performing on the court, field, or rink.  In a documentary conducted by ESPN entitled “Fab Five,” one of the college basketball players for the University of Michigan said, that it was hard to see his jersey in the stands and knowing that just his number was on it, not his name. He later goes on to say that he was not receiving any money from it even though Adidas was promoting his jersey. This Michigan basketball player then says that he could not even afford the jersey that his fans were wearing.  He was wanting to buy a jersey for his mom.

Another argument that supports paying college athletes, is that these “full-ride” scholarships given to the best athletes do not actually cover all their expenses.  Many athletes still cannot afford to have their parents come to the stadium and watch the games.  For example, in 2010, “Duke basketball players were valued at $1,025,656 while [the players were] living just $732 above the poverty line and a scholarship shortfall of $1,995.”   With all of the respect and publicity of these athletes, it goes unnoticed that a great deal of the players live near the poverty line.  Due to this lack of money, black-markets are created.  Here, boosters that represent the university give these players cars, spending money, or anything they truly want. This is because the athletes that they are giving rewards to attend their alma mater.

There have been many instances of this injustice before, but one prominent example is that of Reggie Bush, the running back for the University of Southern California from 2003-2005.  Bush was paid by boosters to attend USC, which violated NCAA rules.  Bush was heavily criticized when the violations were revealed and had to return his Heisman trophy.  While Bush’s actions were clearly wrong, and him returning the Heisman trophy was warranted, it is tough to give him much criticism. Bush did not come from much wealth and even with a “full-ride” football scholarship, he could not cover all of his expenses.  Bush’s mother was having trouble paying rent, so a booster at USC offered to pay for his mother’s apartment in Pasadena.  Bush felt obligated to take this offer, as there was no other way for him to make money and pay for his mother’s apartment.  If Bush were paid for his participation in the NCAA, then Bush would have attended any university that he had wanted to.  These boosters’ actions are not only illegal, but create an imbalance in competition amongst the NCAA.  These universities that violate NCAA rules have an upper edge in recruiting top prospects.  Schools are then tempted to violate such rules to even out the playing field.

Another important reason to pay college athletes, is that it will ensure that most college athletes will complete their college degrees. “Paying student-athletes would provide athletes an incentive to stay in school and complete their degree programs, instead of leaving early for the professional leagues.”  If athletes are paid to play, not only can they cover some of their college expenses that scholarships could not cover, but now they will want to finish their education.  NCAA prides itself that all student-athletes are students first and athletes second. However, it seems that more popular athletes leave early for professional leagues.  In college basketball, many freshman stars are referred to as “one and done” players as they complete one year of college and go to the professional leagues early, as they want money and need it as soon as possible.  The importance of their education is lost.  The university seems to be hypocritical in its actions when it does not pay their athletes, because it seems they support college athletes leaving for the professional league early.  According to the article, a university’s primary objective is to provide its students with a quality education that prepares them to function in the world as opposed to in college. However, without paying athletes, universities leave their students with no other option but to not graduate and withdrawal after a semester or a year to meet their financial obligations.  Logistically, it should be very simple for the universities to compensate their student-athletes.  One author suggests that every university pays the same flat rate to each college athlete for three years, then offer a raise to senior athletes.  This bonus will create that incentive for students to receive their degrees.

While it may seem odd and unjust to pay college athletes, the reality is that compensation of such athletes is a necessity not only to keep competition at a steady level in college athletics, but also to encourage students to graduate and get their college degrees.  The truth of the matter is that many college athletes are already being paid under the table, which creates an unfair black-market. Universities are exploiting these students and allowing them not to receive any of the revenue that they have clearly earned. 

Fifty three point four million dollars is the combined salary of the top 15 paid coaches in division 1 college football, $0 the combined salary of all student-athletes. Over the past few decades, college athletics have gained popularity across the United States. Whether it is football, basketball, or baseball, ever since the turn of the century, intercollegiate sports have brought in a surplus of revenue to their respective Universities. A recent study found that the University of Texas’ Athletic Program had the highest revenue of any other University at a little over $120 million. Yet with this large sum of money, no college athletes are legally compensated for their work. According to NCAA rules, “You are not eligible for participation in a sport if you have ever: Taken pay or the promise of pay, for competing in that sport”.

Student athletes should be compensated for their work, as they are the sole reason for the Athletic Program’s surplus in revenue. These athletes are working for the schools and are doing a service to the college that seems to go unnoticed. Colleges are using these athletes to boost their respective reputations and bring in revenue while not compensating these athletes for their work.

Everywhere else athletes are paid, so why should not college students too? Some critics may argue that these student-athletes are amateurs, and if paid then are becoming professional athletes. The minor league for baseball could be considered an amateur sport, although they do receive pay according to the team’s revenue. Also, with all the time practicing and working in the classroom, how many athletes have time to actually get a job? Another argument that supports paying college athletes is that these “full-ride” scholarships given to the best athletes do not actually cover all their expenses. Many athletes still can’t afford to have their parents come to the stadium and watch the games. With all of the respect and publicity of these athletes, it goes unnoticed that a great deal of the players live very near to the poverty line. Due to this lack of money, black-markets are created. Here, boosters that represent the University give these players’ cars, spending money, or anything they truly want, and in return, these players go to their respective University.

The last and arguably the most important reason to pay college athletes, is that it will ensure that most student-athletes will complete their college degrees. “Paying student-athletes would provide an incentive to stay in school and complete their degree programs, instead of leaving early for the professional leagues” Which brings me back to the question, “Should college athletes get paid?” If athletes are paid to play, not only can they cover some of their college expenses that scholarships couldn’t, but also now they will want to finish their education. NCAA prides itself on all student-athletes are students first and athletes second, however, it seems that more popular athletes leave early for the pros.

In college basketball, many freshman stars are referred to as “one and done” players as they complete one year of college and go to the professional leagues early, as they want money and need it as soon as possible. The importance of their education is lost. The University seems to be hypocritical in its actions when it doesn’t pay its athletes, because it seems they support college athletes leaving for the Professional league early. One author suggests that every university pays the same flat rate to each college athlete for three years, and then offer a raise to senior athletes. This bonus will create that incentive for students to receive their degrees.

While it may seem odd and unjust to pay college athletes, the reality is that compensation of such athletes is a necessity not only to keep competition at a steady level in college athletics, but also to encourage students to graduate and get their college degrees. The truth of the matter is that many college athletes are already being paid under the table which creates a black-market that is not only illegal, but is also unfair to universities that abide by NCAA regulations. Universities are exploiting these students and allowing them not to receive any revenue that they clearly earned.
