Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Professor of Finance at Syracuse University. He frequently appears on CNN, ESPN, and other news networks to discuss his innovative ideas for reforming college athletics. Bleacher Report was thrilled to have an opportunity to interview Dr. Watkins about his belief that college athletes should get paid.
1) People often say that the opportunity to receive a free education
is enough compensation for college athletes. What's wrong with that argument?
A free education is valuable, no one knows that better than a college professor. The problem is that we can’t assume that $30,000 per year is fair compensation for any job. If Tom Cruise stars in a blockbuster film, he is going to kick your butt if you try to pay him $30,000, even if you throw room and board in with it. In America, you get paid what you’re worth.
I see many athletes who are literally responsible for bringing $20M per year into their campuses, yet their mothers are starving to death or homeless. This should be a shame for us all, since I’ve never seen a D-I college coach’s mother go hungry.
2) If colleges could pay athletes, the wealthier schools would appear to have an advantage. Do you think there would need to be a salary cap or other measures put in place to ensure some parity in college sports?
I am not opposed to the idea of a salary cap, although I haven’t seen a salary cap for coaches. My goal is not to support preferential treatment for athletes, I only endorse fairness. I don’t see why coaches and athletes can’t have the same rules. They are all under the same pressure to win, they are both treated as professionals and expected to produce as professionals. This pressure doesn’t come from the fact that their campuses love sports so much, it’s because CAMPUSES WANT THE MONEY. They are pushing these guys much harder on the court and the field than they do in the classroom, because good grades don’t pay university bills; only big wins bring in big paychecks.
But in terms of a salary cap, I would not be opposed to that. The NCAA is lucky, since they are the only multi-billion sports league that can get away with paying their players 1/100 of what they are worth. Players would be ecstatic to play for $150,000 per year, which is far less than the millions many of them would earn in a fair market system. The money wouldn’t have to come from university budgets, they could start by sharing the money coaches get from shoe deals. After all, the players are the ones we pay to see and they are the ones wearing the shoes. But as a general rule, the Finance and free market capitalist in me doesn’t like the idea of any kind of government regulation restricting wages. I am sure coaches wouldn’t like a cap on their wages either.
3) Do you think that recruits should be offered contracts by schools
based on the performance they showed in high school? How would one individual's contract differ from another?
18 comments Last one added about 1 year ago — Leave a Comment
Jeremy Kaufman about 1 year ago
This honestly may be the best article I have ever read on the Bleacher Report. While I had previously been opposed to paying student- athletes, your well thought- out points have shown me just how unjust the NCAA is by not providing student athletes with more than a scholarship. Dissapointingly enough, as a rugby player, I wouldn't end up getting paid regardless (as rugby as not currently sanctioned by the NCAA). Anyway, thanks for the great insight, and I hope to read more from you soon.
Edit Comment Cancel
george winkleberry about 1 year ago
Schools could just stop giving athletic scholarships to students from poor backgrounds who aren't serious or smart enough to benefit from a college education. That would cerainly end the exploitation and be a lot more sensible for schools from a financial standpoint. After all, schools were filling their stadiums just fine in the decades before they started 'exploiting' African-Americans.
Edit Comment Cancel
Rod Moore about 1 year ago
That`s pretty presumptious of you George,assuming that all African American student athletes are from poor homes, not smart enough,or not serious enough to benefit from a college education.It`s prejudicial thinking like that is why we are in this situation now.
Edit Comment Cancel
Zander Freund about 1 year ago
Mr. Watkins,
Bleacher Report is an Open Source Sports Network which acknowledges everyone's right to an opinion—our staff does not endorse official positions on such issues.
That said, I personally agree with your stance 100%. This matter has in fact been bothering me for some time.
I'd go as far as to say that as of right now, Division I college athletics practice borderline slavery, and at the very least is guilty of rampant exploitation of their athletes.
You call the NCAA out appropriately when you say: "I see many athletes who are literally responsible for bringing $20M per year into their campuses, yet their mothers are starving to death or homeless. This should be a shame for us all, since I’ve never seen a D-1 college coach’s mother go hungry."
It boggles my mind that Americans are so outraged by the dirty money that infiltrates college sports (see: O.J. Mayo) while not understanding that this kind of practice is a symptom of a far larger problem. As you correctly point out, colleges don't pay their athletes for purely selfish financial reasons, not because it would "undermine the integrity of the game." The quoted phrase is laughable and absurd in the context of justifying a system which exploits the very talent that generates millions of dollars in revenue for Universities across the country.
Just as troubling to me is that their is still a stigma against high school athletes who go to the pros to earn a fair market wage—as if by wishing to be paid according to their worth they are doing something morally wrong.
Wake up America: athletes wishing to earn money for their services are doing nothing different from college coaches or administrators, NCAA officials, or any other American who goes out every day to make a living.
Thank you for sharing your opinion on this matter; our Community has debated this issue at length and I'm sure your article will spark further lively discussion. We hope to see you again soon.
Edit Comment Cancel
DALE WEINBERG about 1 year ago
With all of the money that college sports brings in to the Different Universities...I feel that the student athletes should be compensated. As far as the exact type of compensation for each sport...the compensation should vary based on the type of sport. THE COMPENSATION FOR ALL SCHOOLS SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR EACH ATHLETE. A student athlete from North Carolina will make the same money as a person going to a smaller Division 1 School.
HERE IS A THOUGHT...all student athlete Football and Basketball players would make $500 a week for 52 weeks. If a student athlete maikes a certain GPA like a B or better...then he would receive an incentive bonus which can add another $500 a week to his income. I would also create an incentive for a student athlete who graduates from the University. A S.A. with a GPA under 3.0 will get a $5,000 bonus and a S.A. with a GPA above 3.0 will get $10,000.
*Incentive programs in the business world work...so, why not make these incentives available to the student athletes. This is fair, because it does not give a school an advantage over another school. It give the S.A. a chance to make some decent money. It may also help in keeping some of these athletes in school longer rather than opting out of school to go to the pro level. It also answers the issue of college graduation rates with an incentive to graduate. With the news media, internet and other avenues of revenue ...many universities are making big money and they should share it with the student athlete. Recently, many coaches are making million dollar contracts..shoe deals and TV shows.
*Other sports like Tennis, swimming, fencing...etc would make less money, because they bring in less money, but I am sure a reasonable number can be arrived at thus the Universities and the NCAA, but the number has to be level with all schools. JUST A THOUGHT
Edit Comment Cancel
Adam Amick about 1 year ago
Great piece. I hadn't considered the inflow of cash to universities based on athletics, versus the scholarships provided to student athletes before. I would say the universities are definitely making out for the good in that deal.
Also I agree that the rules regarding transfers for coaches and athletes should be more closely aligned. Since the coaches tend to be the front men for bringing the student/athlete into a school, and that athlete may choose his school based on the coach, then he should not be penalized for wanting to leave for the coach departing.
Perhaps the answer to that issue is to remove "buy-out" clauses from coaches' contracts. Make them serve out what they signed for... Soldiers have to. Unless they don't provide results, then the school can fire them. But as long as a coach recruits an athlete, that athlete can examine the coach's contract and make a decision based on possible longevity.
That all being said (geared more toward the exploitation of student/athletes) then the standards for athletic scholarships should be re-examined and changed accordingly. If an athlete is bringing a substantial income to a university, then perhaps a complete compensation package should be created, beyond room/board/education.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jay Middleton about 1 year ago
I agree 100% that athletes should receive compensation for the value they add to their schools. But the problem alluded to in Q. 2 is less a matter of parity and more a question of survival. Many Div-1 programs are in financial crunches as it is, and are already being forced to cut several sports out of the picture. These schools aren't paying coaches seven-figure salaries, and they don't have lucrative shoe deals. I've yet to see a model that would explain how these programs could remain solvent given the added expenditures, though I think Dale is on the right path above.
But still, somebody needs to run some numbers before we can take these proposals seriously.
"The market knows ALL ANSWERS to ALL QUESTIONS."
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/blog/comments/what-is-a-bubble/
And don't even get me started on the price of rice.
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan L. about 1 year ago
Great article. Awesome from start to finish. I think the thing that is holding the NCAA back is that no one is really advocating for it day and not. It is one of those topics brought up here and there and debated for about 5 minutes, but nothing ever happens. The NCAA won't do anything until there is an outcry from athletes, athlete's families, and fans of collegiate sports.
Edit Comment Cancel
Aron Glatzer about 1 year ago
Americans become upset when info leaks on players being currently paid as amateurs because they like to believe that NCAA sporting is a pure being. The system is obviously inherently flawed, but I really don't believe paying college athletes during the recruitment process is the right avenue to follow. What then? Start paying the top junior high athletes to eventually come to your school?
Should the billions made in college sports be more evenly dispersed than going to coaches and Athletic Directors? Sure. But if you are worried about the sharks and agents already exploiting these players at such a formative age, imagine what will occur when it is accepted as the norm?
If I could run it, I would not allow players to be paid during the recruiting process. Instead, I would have players paid based on production. Take a college football, basketball, etc. team, figure out how much profit the team generated the past season, then kick down appropriate payment dispersed through the team based on production. That way, the Heisman winner gets paid as a Heisman winner, and the players who aren't yet contributing get hungry to work harder in the offseason to contribute the next season.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jimbo about 1 year ago
Dr. Watkins,
Although I have no doubt about your sincerity regarding this issue, I wish someone other than yourself was asking the questions. Here are just two that I would have asked:
You say that you see many athletes who are literally responsible for bringing in $20M per year to their campuses and whose mothers are starving to death or homeless. Could you mention by name even one of these student athletes and the situtation with their mother?
You would like to see athletes paid what their fair market value would be in the real world, but you also want their teams to allow them to miss practice and games if their studies get in the way. My employer pays me a fair wage. If my son's soccer practice, or my daughter's violin recital, conflict with my work schedule, I am expected to be at work. Why do you believe the same should not apply to a paid athlete?
Forgive me if these comments come across in the cold black and white of type as antagonistic. They are not meant to be. I just think that an article espousing an opinion this deeply felt should be able to withstand valid counter-arguments.
Thanks,
-Jim
Edit Comment Cancel
Doug Adams about 1 year ago
he didnt ask the QS it was an interview
Edit Comment Cancel
Jimbo about 1 year ago
I assumed Dr. Watkins created the questions himself because it is on his own profile, but fair enough. My third question is: Who interviewed Dr. Watkins? -J C
Edit Comment Cancel
Cazelon None about 1 year ago
The farthest I could go toward pay for college athletes would be to offer a reasonable, capped and identical stipend so they could offset expenses and perhaps undertake some social activities to round them out beyond their athletic experience. To stem any arguments over what "reasonable" means, I'll suggest in the area of $15,000 per year in addition to scholarship funds, assuming full scholarship, and this only for sports teams generating income for the university. This would restrict stipends, for all intents and purposes, to footballers and basketballers, and perhaps hockey players. Let's face it, no other teams make any money for schools, but are instead a money sink. To give a stipend to other, money-losing varsity sports is absurd on its face. Regular, non-athlete students have to work summers and during school year to defray expenses -- athletes enjoying a scholarship in a sport that only cost the university, as opposed to helping enrich it (monetarily) should thank their stars for whatever help they are getting. Setting up a free-market style contract system for college athletes would be a disaster, except of course for the agents and lawyers. College ball does more than just make money for the schools, too. It serves as a qualification process for the pros; many youngsters are not capable of pro life without the college-level experience and maturation. I think even more than the physical and mental skills they need for the sport, the maturation of their thinking skills and the curbing of their (often) incredible egos is absolutely required before they are subjected to lawyers, agents, and huge sums of money. Adulation is one thing, and they get that by the boatload. Adulation and gobs of money -- we'd all be puking on college ball for the unbearable individuals and soap operas that would ensue.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jonathan Rudd about 1 year ago
Under the logical pattern you have set forth in your discussion of players and coaches, Dr. Watkins, isn't it unfair on some base level that you are paid to teach and your students are not paid to learn? How is this any different than players' and coaches relationships?
Edit Comment Cancel
Jonathan Rudd about 1 year ago
A collegiate voice teacher trains students, who in turn have recitals. University theater departments put on plays. now I'm not saying I've seen 50,000 screaming fans at a Vocal recital, but undeniably these other programs generate revenue for their schools. A grad student who is published in a lofty journal garishes acclaim for his university. Would you have them be compensated as well?
And I must strongly disagree with your claim that these atheletes are professionals anyway. They are very much amateurs. What percentage of collegiate atheletes go onto a professional sports career? It's no different thatn a second year med student. Do they know some terminology? Sure. Could they fool a lay person into thinking they know what they are talking about? Certainly. But until you let that second year med student preform open heart surgery on you, I will remain sceptical of your faith in amateurs.
And, lastly, I must take issue with your assesment that the free market knows the answer to all questions. Ask the free market about the abolition of slavery and child labor laws - both of which were, at the time, vehemently opposed by the free market. Ask the free market about accountability. The free market is charging me four dollars for the same gallon of gas that was 99 cents ten years ago. It seems to me the free market finds the most outrageous price that a few people (either rich or stupid or both) are willing to pay, and then charges everyone that price. if you won't pay it, there's a sucker born every minute.
The free market tells me that I have a voice - if i don't like a product's cost, I can simply not purchase it and it will come down.
So, America, drop your health insurance and stop buying gas. These are your options in the free market. Do without or pay out what we say.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jonathan Rudd about 1 year ago
"Forgive me if these comments come across in the cold black and white of type as antagonistic. They are not meant to be. I just think that an article espousing an opinion this deeply felt should be able to withstand valid counter-arguments. "
Ditto for me. No hard feelings, Dr. Watkins, I just see it differently I guess.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jimbo about 1 year ago
Jonathan, I don't know who your writer is, but that guy is a good! ;)
Edit Comment Cancel
Jay Urban about 1 year ago
Professor Watkins,
I am in agreement that athletes should be paid.
What would you say to my idea that we should let the market dictate the who receives these payments and how much they are paid? This would solve the most pressing issue regarding your first point. It would also keep the money out of the educational system.
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.