College Sports have been a staple in American life for many decades and they will continue to do so but not without major changes. Over the last 10-15 years’ college sports has grown exponentially large and the NCAA is implementing new rules, extra games, and many more hours for the student athletes to work around. College sports have never been as big as they are today and the players should be getting rewarded for that. We now have an issue of whether the college players should be getting paid that nobody even 20 years ago would of thought could be a possibility in collegiate athletics. These players must go to school first and still must work around the same number of hours a that the professional athletes work. College Athletes deserve to rightly be compensated for their play in their respective sport. There is much controversy on this topic as many people want to keep the tradition of college sports but now many want the NCAA to catch up on the times and give the players what they deserve for each of their individual sports. That is what the Par for Play system will give these players.

They are bringing in thousands, even millions of dollars to the Universities that they are representing. There is so much money being brought into these programs that it seems unethical to not pay these athletes. One specific reason why this is a big issue in sports right now is because of major TV deals that the NCAA is receiving. “That $11 billion deal between the NCAA and CBS/Turner Sports for March Madness between 2011 and 2024. We're talking $11 billion for three weekends of television per year” (Wilbon 4). This is the problem. You have the NCAA making billions and these students are struggling to eat and do things that normal students can do. The big issue is trying to distribute the money equally between men and women but also between the big market sports, like football and basketball, compared to lacrosse and baseball. Therefore, the Pay for Play system would be the most beneficial as it will rid of and Title IX issues because the players are getting paid only for revenue their sport brings into the university. Michael Wilbon starts to explain this in his article and uses the example that the system is going to favor the football and basketball teams the most, especially at big time programs, like Alabama “So, I don't want to hear that it's "unfair" to pay the quarterback of Alabama more than all the sociology students in the undergraduate college” (Wilbon 6). It is a very intriguing discussion point and the fact is that the markets for certain sports are bigger than others and the Pay for play system is trying to benefit all athletes, at all universities.

This is an issue that many casual sports fans have been introduced to more recently due to expanding schedules, 24-hour social media coverage, and many other contributing factors that have cause interest in fans. This was not a problem in 2007 because there was not that constant coverage that we now have and it has exposed itself on a bigger scale now that we are all connected all day, everyday. Casual fans now have inside access to the college athlete’s life and get the chance to see how they live compared to regular students. This problem would not be as relevant today if it weren’t for that constant coverage and with that a change must occur because everyone can now see the problem from the first-hand viewpoint.

The system that has been in place forever has a strict policy on paying players, giving them gifts, and selling an article of personal belonging for profit. Many athletes cannot accept any gifts or anything from fans and it creates internal issues that the NCAA has taken players to court, suspended them, or have them kicked out of the league completely. These players are working with their sport, as long, if not longer than some professionals, the schedules keep growing without any consent from players, and now the stakes to win a national championship are higher than ever. This is an immense amount of pressure that Universities and the NCAA place on these student’s without helping them out in payments, except in scholarships that can only be put toward school tuition, room, food. There needs to be a positive change that will not only pay the players but help the NCAA continue to make the money it needs to operate. Overall the entire college athletic system is flawed and it really should be looked at and changed in some ways. There are plenty of ways to resolve this and the NCAA should take a closer consider how it can fix itself.  

There is a system that would not only pay the players but it would also make sure that each university and the NCAA were also making their money. This system, Pay for Play introduced by Joe Nocero is his NY Times article in 2016. This system would be a salary based system that would set up the players with a very respectable amount of money. Obviously, this would apply to each sport at the schools but this article focus on the big market sports, “Every Division I men’s basketball and football team would have a salary cap, just as the pros do — except the amounts would be vastly lower. In basketball, the cap would be $650,000. In football, it would be $3 million” (Nocero 14). This would set up the teams to pay out each of its players from a set amount of money that is from previous seasons revenue and any extra money that the teams have, which they do because many Power 5 schools are paying their head coaches millions of dollars. They should be able to use about half of this salary cap from the current players and use the rest as a recruiting tool to be able to get highly touted recruits to give each school a look to how much money they could receive compared to other programs. “One university might want to offer a star halfback $40,000, while another might offer him $60,000. The player would make a choice based not on a recruiter’s sweet-talking promises — or not solely on that — but on cold, hard cash” (Nocero 17).  This not only helps bring in better players but eventually leads to more money for the programs because the team is getting players, producing better results on the field. 

This system has many other benefits as well. Now, that players can receive money, boosters are able to pay these players too. Universities can set up tax-deductible funds that the boosters can put money into, instead of just giving cash directly to the school, it is going to the players. This helps get rid of the current day problem of sneaking money and benefits under the table to the athletes. Now this system would need to have contract, which would enforce policy of staying for a certain amount of time, whether it be all 4 years, or maybe 2-3 instead of having the one and done players in basketball, which helps build foundations for the sports programs, which in turn make more money. Another flaw that those who refute this idea, would say that paying some players more than others would create problems in the locker room, but that is how life has always been in the pro’s, so why would it be any different at the college level. Many professional leagues have player unions, and that is a problem that college athletes thought they would face but it turns out they already have a union, “It is called the National College Players Association, headed by Ramogi Huma” (Nocero 20). Already having a union in place makes this system look more and more appealing to the players and it has shown over the course of the last 5 seasons, many players would be wanting to get this done. This will be very beneficial in the first 5 years of implementing this system, “The N.C.P.A. would negotiate with the N.C.A.A. and the Power 5 over the salary cap and minimum salaries, which would probably increase over time. It would also have a seat at the table when the conferences and the N.C.A.A. negotiate with the networks over television rights” (Nocero 22). It does sound confusing but this exact system is almost the same how music royalties are handled and the Power 5 conferences would have to set up a system to split up the prime-time games. This system has potential to completely change college sports and hopefully something like this will be implemented within the next 5-10 years so that college sports and no longer flawed by the strict imposition by the NCAA. 

A typical Division 1 football player must work 15 hours a day daily. They wake up at 6 am and do not stop for breaks until 9 pm that same day. They must put in all their school work in the morning, after lifting, and then have a 4 four long practice of some type, meetings, lift, practice, other day-day activities in the afternoon, until 9 pm when they must be studying again. These players are putting in hours of week each day and are only receiving a scholarship, which I am not saying is a bad thing, it is just not the just payment they should be receiving for 15 hour days for 6 days a week. Players should be playing with incentive in high school and if an athlete is a special talent, they deserve to want to get paid as soon as they go to college and have long weeks of work. In the past, many former athletes have come out against the NCAA for the unfair amount of work they did for them, and not getting anything out of it. Most recently it was the O’Bannon v NCAA case that occurred in 2009. Edward O’Bannon was a former UCLA basketball player that won the 1985 championship and he filed for an antitrust violation against the NCAA. This case was for major football and basketball players in the NCAA that states “that once a payer graduated, that he/she was entitled to financial compensation for the NCAA commercial uses of his or her image” (Wong 1097). This goes back to the video games created that used the name and numbers of over 100,000 athletes and they did not get paid a single cent for their usage in the game. Having past athletes come out against the NCAA does not help their case any, with the specific issue. If the NCAA is going to continue to not want to pay its players, they are going to continue to face the reality of the situation. The players are pissed off and want to receive the money that they earned during their playing careers This situation is going to continue to arise in the next five to ten years and a change needs to get done.

There are many benefits to paying our college athletes in a new age system. Of those benefits, included are; it attracts the best talent, it encourages the healthy players, and the money would evenly be distributed to fit the schools/sports teams need. Attracted talent is a huge component of college sports, because if you don’t attract any talent, you are going to go nowhere as a team, coach, university. Having an initiative to get paid from top universities is the biggest key in implanting this system. When prospects are given the opportunity to receive real compensation instead of just the scholarship, it will motivate them to continue to get better, which will make everyone happier in the end. As a college student, having money to look forward to is the most important part of my week, and if I don’t get my money for the weeks’ worth of work, I won’t be able to provide for myself for the week. This is the same exact situation that college athletes are finding themselves in week after week. They need to be getting some type of payment to get them to give their best effort and if they are unable to receive anything, morale does drop quite quickly. Those players need that motivation each week to not only boost their own morale, but to also allow them to be paid for their weeks’ worth of hard work. 

Distributing the money seems to be the biggest factor that many experts are predicting as the key to passing a new system. With this Pay for Play system we should be able to distribute the money easily. “Many people believe that it is more deserving and righteous that earnings from TV networks running the games should go back into the schools as a whole and not to the individual players. Then, the money would be disbursed evenly throughout the school, resulting to lower tuition rates and improved school program” (Green). Going about the system in this way, by paying the school rather than the players is not the most beneficial tactic. Having this, in place, is almost what they have today because schools and conferences already make money from their schools playing in big games, so paying the school is not the right way to set up a successful system. If we were to pay anybody, it should be the team directly, instead of the school. Paying the program gives them to evenly distribute the money to the players, coaches, and to building new facilities and fields. Each program would receive the revenue that they deserve and it would create a NCAA economic boom, that would not only help the NCAA but help the economy overall. Having all this extra cash flowing through the system is what will be the most beneficial scenario. 

This argument is refuting by a lot of people. These people want to keep college sports the same in a changing industry. This is no longer just a sports market that college sports are targeting. They have so many different ads, campaigns and other issues that are bringing in casual sports fans or even non-sports fans at all, talking all about the games that happen each year in the College Football Playoff and March Madness. They target al types of people for these games using specific logos, ethos, and pathos to get more and more people watching college athletics. Many of these people just getting into college ports are seeing how the players are treated and how much the players work during big events and they are on my side of the argument. Those “old timers” that want to keep sports as is have one argument that is still relevant.  “the camaraderie of game day, the tailgating, the atmosphere of a stadium packed with nearly 100,000 fans and the pride of cheering for a university team -- are at stake” (Panim). This argument is very relevant because many of the older generations have been around since the dawn of college sports and its huge growth over the last 50 years of the 20th century and they don’t want to lose what they watched grow. Another argument is that the college athletes are not legally considered professionals. Having them called professionals would be false because they are, in fact amateurs. These amateurs are putting in almost the same number of hours, travelling, and media coverage that the professionals also receive. When you combine these factors, it becomes clear that these players should be getting paid for the play. This situation needs a through look at by NCAA officials but also legal representatives that can assist these players in getting paid soon.

Collegiate athletics is one of the most intriguing aspects of American life. We watch student athletes as if they are professionals. We need to pay them as they are professionals. Hopefully the NCAA decides to pay its players because they rightfully deserve to get a payment for their work. 
