Sign up or login to track your favorite teams

Sign Up for Bleacher Report

As a registered user you can subscribe to your favorite teams, post comments, write your own articles, and much more.

You must register in order for that functionality to work!







Validating sign up form ...

Bleacher Report articles are written by fans like you

Do you want to cover your favorite sports, teams, and leagues?

Processing writing preferences ...

Great, , you're signed up!

i.e. Big 10, LeBron James, USC Football

Selected Tags:

Logging in ...

I enjoyed the interesting piece written by Michael Collins describing why he feels that a scholarship is more than enough for college athletes...

A Scholarship Is Nice, but College Athletes Should Still Be Paid

by Boyce Watkins (Scribe)

69

4,839 reads

Sports

July 10, 2008


I enjoyed the interesting piece written by Michael Collins describing why he feels that a scholarship is more than enough for college athletes. 

I don’t want to get into a back and forth with him or anyone else on this topic, since I am not sure how productive that would be.  I think that when it comes to this interesting issue, we should present the evidence, information and ideas, and allow people to come to their own conclusions. Even if I disagree with his opinions, you should know that I respect and appreciate them.

In his article, Collins mentions many of the same arguments used by NCAA President Myles Brand regarding why it is impossible, devastating and ultimately wrong to compensate college athletes.  He mentions the high cost of college tuition, the complications of implementing a fair compensation system, and how the NCAA is ultimately protecting the athletes and their families from the strife that they themselves are willing to endure in order to keep us watching exciting games on Saturday afternoon.

How noble of them.

When it comes to the NCAA, simplicity is the best approach.  You see, anyone attempting to withhold resources from another individual or group of people will always find a long list of complicated reasons that they can’t pay you: they are protecting you in some way, they need the money, they’ve already spent your money elsewhere, the list goes on and on.  That might be what you call the “it would be too complicated to figure out how to pay you” argument.  The truth, however, is if there is money to be made, the NCAA finds a way around all the complications.  When it is time to negotiate the complications of getting a $4 million dollar per year coach onto campus, the NCAA finds a way to get the deal done.  When they have to negotiate multi-year TV rights deals, international broadcast restrictions, and complex zoning regulations in order to prepare for the Final Four, they get it done.  But when the athletes come to the table demanding their share of the gravy train, the response suddenly becomes “we can’t figure out how to make it work, it’s just too complicated!”  This form of intellectual laziness is problematic from an organization that has gobs of PhDs in its association.  

Then there is the “we can’t afford to pay you” argument. Let’s be clear: The NCAA makes money, lots of it. Their annual revenues are in line with the NBA, NFL and NHL.  So, the notion that we should, for one second, feel sorry for them because they are losing money is tough to imagine. If the NCAA were not making money, they would not be paying hundreds of millions of dollars for the building of elaborate stadiums, the purchase of luxury homes for their coaches, or the massive compensation packages of marketing and promotional teams.  The same humility and financial conservatism they expect from the athletes (many of whom have families in dire poverty) is not mirrored by their own extravagant behavior.

Then there is the following argument: “What about Title IX and the fact that we’ve already spent YOUR SHARE of the money paying for every sport across campus? (Please share this with your mother as she is getting evicted from her house)” Issues such

Track this Article on My B/R
Flag This Article
Share This Article

69 comments Last one added 8 months ago — Leave a Comment

  1. Quentin McCall 12 months ago

    Excellent analysis.

    There is only one even remotely reasonable argument against not paying players... and it's the fear that making every 18 year old player a young professional could conflict with the responsibility of being a "scholar athlete".

    But that a) isn't their argument to my knowledge and b) doesn't hold much weight when the NCAA is making so much money off the "scholar athletes".

    Although it may appear extreme to compare them to sweat shop labor, there is no doubt that this is an exploitative interaction.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  2. andrew 12 months ago

    Hell no they should not be paid. I already pay too much for college already.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  3. Jordan Schwartz 12 months ago

    Why stop with college players? Why not pay 14-year-old high school freshmen who bring in money for their schools, coaches and local media outlets?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  4. Jordan Schwartz 12 months ago

    Yup, Chris, college athletes are exactly like slaves. Good comparison.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  5. John Tidwell 12 months ago

    I agree. College athletes should be paid. With food stamps. That should help a lot.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • adam miller 8 months ago

      actually i am a college athlete and that would be nice i dont play football so i am not on full scholorship but athletes put in lots of hours besides for school and you hear non athlete students say they do not have time for a job bc of school well for us you have to put school plus practice and travel so even money for basic grocieries would be nice and really appriciated

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  6. Chris Hoeler 12 months ago

    How about the fact that they don't pay tuition because of scholarships...that is more than enough payment for playing.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Adam Helfgott 12 months ago

      THANK YOU, that should be enough, you're getting a FREE EDUCATION!!! Which is worth way more than getting paid to play a sport.
      I would be outraged as a student in college to see a football or baseball or any college athlete at my school getting a free education then getting money on top of that to do whatever they like with their money that they get from me paying my tuition.
      College athletes should not be paid, simple enough most big time athletes go to school for free and then get their money in the pros and thats good enough.
      Might as well pay the 4.0 GPA bio-major students as well.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      Guys, do the math. Free college tuition does not equal a market salary for some of these guys, who could go play in the NBA and rake in millions.

      I know that in theory "free education" sounds great, but you gotta realize how much dough the top dawgs bring in for their Universities. Why is a Coach entitled to a multi-million dollar contract and not a player?

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Tim Coughlin 12 months ago

      Should college newspaper editor-in-chiefs be paid what professional editors are paid?

      Should college doctorate students be paid more than scholarships to work on their thesis papers?

      It's the same thing. They're developing their future professional skill to be marketable at the professional level. Everyone pays their dues, and there's nothing wrong with that.

      The biggest problem is where should this money come from? Raise tuition for other real students? Raise ticket prices?

      What about Section 9? That would be a huge impasse.

      You can't just jump into these ideas without thinking of the repercussions.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Tim Coughlin 12 months ago

      Title IX...my bad. Even though you brought it up, I don't think you addressed it enough. I think that's the biggest thing that'd keep this from happening, aside from colleges and the NCAA never wanting to give away more money and allow the good, profitable teams to get even better.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  7. Todd Morse 12 months ago

    I feel this article has some merit in coaches pay as well as the tight restrictions on an athlete's activity, and believe those could use tweaking or review. On campus housing for coaches and a limit on coaches salaries makes a lot of sense to me, except your article seems to want less restrictions and wants to use the fact that coaches dont live by the same rules as the main reason for paying athletes.

    However I have a few questions:

    where the financials about the Yankees losing money came from?

    how many cases are there of athletes with parents being evicted from their homes, and why do their parents matter more than the average student attending college who has to pay tuition?

    You speak mainly of basketball and football, but what about a school like Johns Hopkins, that is primarily an academic school but has a world class lacrosse team? Or a school like UNC, USC of FSU, who are so diversified in sports? Wouldnt this eliminate some of that diversity, as they would be forced to pick and choose some programs to eliminate to keep certain programs extremely successful?

    How is an athlete with a scholarship is different from a student majoring in a science, mathematics, art or performing art, literature or other worthy domain and ends up making money for the school somehow through publishing a paper, making a discovery, becoming famous, being famous and choosing to attend that school or some other way. Should Natalie Portman have been paid financially by Harvard to go there because she chose to attend and brought it further notoriety?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      Here are some answers, though I can't say I've researched the subject extensively:

      "how many cases are there of athletes with parents being evicted from their homes, and why do their parents matter more than the average student attending college who has to pay tuition?"

      Plenty of cases, you gotta be kidding me. A significant number of top athletes come from the slums.

      Their parents don't "matter more" than the average students parents—Mr. Watkins is simply pointing out the absurdity of a situation where an athlete from a poor family is making millions of dollars for his college while his mother can't afford to keep her house. You surely can see why that's a little ridiculous.

      Let's also not forget that this is a question of ECONOMIC VALUE to a school. I was once a regular college student too, but unfortunately I didn't bring in kagillions of dollars in revenue every year—hence why my college didn't owe me shit.

      "You speak mainly of basketball and football, but what about a school like Johns Hopkins, that is primarily an academic school but has a world class lacrosse team?"

      $$$$$—how much money does the John's Hopkins lacrosse team make for their school? Probably some, so it wouldn't be out of the question to compensate the players on that team accordingly. Surely less though than a DI Football star who is literally feeding the faculty with his talents.

      "Or a school like UNC, USC of FSU, who are so diversified in sports? Wouldnt this eliminate some of that diversity, as they would be forced to pick and choose some programs to eliminate to keep certain programs extremely successful?"

      I think it without question would force the school to make cuts in their other programs as that's the only way to make the economic equation work out. Somebody's gotta get a cut—and it's not going to be the coach of the basketball team. Surely a downside of the proposal.

      "How is an athlete with a scholarship is different from a student majoring in a science, mathematics, art or performing art, literature or other worthy domain and ends up making money for the school somehow through publishing a paper, making a discovery, becoming famous, being famous and choosing to attend that school or some other way."

      If a student majoring in science writes a revolutionary paper that generates millions of dollars in grants for the school, I think they should without question be compensated for their discovery. Again, it comes down to the principle of exploitation being wrong, pure and simple. Just because someone's in college doesn't mean they shouldn't share in the profits they make for a school (which is really just a company that serves a purpose that is particularly valuable to society).

      However let's remember that most such discoveries come courtesy of professors—whereas in athletics, a much higher percentage of the revenue is derived from the students.

      "Should Natalie Portman have been paid financially by Harvard to go there because she chose to attend and brought it further notoriety?"

      You'd have to try and assign an economic value to that notoriety. I'm sure someone could come up with an equation that gives you an actual answer though (clearly ain't me!)

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  8. andrew 12 months ago

    its not who is making money off of who. Athletes need the opportunity of a higher education just as much as the school needs the publicity. Its a mutual privilege for both sides. Now the scholarship may hinder them from getting a job during college, but typically there is enough money left over to get what they need. Not to mention the awesome media coverage of their college career to propel them into the NBA. And whats better than leaving college with no debt and on your way to a very, very successful career?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      What about the guys who are superstars in college but don't have the body type or athleticism to compete in the NBA? There are too many of them to count...and they often generate millions of dollars in revenue for the school the same way that someone who will one day make the NBA does.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Jeremy Meeks 12 months ago

      You got close to the best argument here. Playing collegiate sports is mutually beneficial for both the players and the NCAA. I'd agree that the NCAA gets the better end of it, but its still a good deal for players of all skill levels.

      Please see my response article for my explanation:
      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/36728-athletes-dont-need-to-be-paid-a-response-to-boyce-watkins-article

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  9. Doug Adams 12 months ago

    99 percent of college athletes do not go pro...its bothersome when ppl assume they will all go off to make tons of money in professional leagues...even most that do go pro in sports do not make that much....most NFL players careers end in 3 years

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • andrew 12 months ago

      well im sure if they are able to have a full-ride scholarship or able to make "fair market value" to pay for their entire college tuition, they will have a taste of the big leagues. From then on, its all about how much effort they put into it.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Shaun Ahmad 12 months ago

      If you won't make it to the pro's, take advantage of your free education and get a 9-5 job like everyone else. You have a chance of coming out with no debt as opposed to over 60% of college grads who come out with thousands in the hole.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      Thank you Doug.

      "well im sure if they are able to have a full-ride scholarship or able to make "fair market value" to pay for their entire college tuition, they will have a taste of the big leagues. From then on, its all about how much effort they put into it."

      Ludicrous point Andrew! I don't even know where to begin...are you suggesting that everyone who gets a free ride to college will be drafted in the pros? HA!

      And come on...of course "effort" matters, but let's not pretend like that's the only factor in whether or not an athlete becomes successful on the professional level. I personally know professional athletes who will never become superstars and they work their asses off. There's also plenty of punks out there with loads of talent who shag it in practice but coast on their natural abilities.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  10. Edmon 12 months ago

    Sure, pay them and let them practice in a average gym. Do you know how much of that money that the NCAA makes goes right back into making these kids stellar athletes? I'm sure that state of the art weight rooms, film rooms, and training staffs that these kids use on a daily basis are cheap.

    Comparing athletes to slaves is just about as stupid as the person who would see a comparision to start with.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  11. Michael Inglis 12 months ago

    one problem, what about the rest of the students who aren't playing sports? Shouldn't they get paid too?

    Lets be honest, guys that go to college for just one year don't go to class very often because they don't need to. So why should we reward the kids that don't go to class and make the kid who made a 1400 on his SAT pay thousands of dollars to attend college.

    Lets not forget, this is college, the purpose is suppose to be to get an education and sports are secondary.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      Michael, Michael, Michael...think about what you just said.

      "What about the rest of the students who aren't playing sports? Shouldn't they get paid too?"

      Students should only be paid if they are generating significant revenue for their school. Students such as myself who reaped the benefits of college without creating any economic value for the school are not owed a dime. Students who play hoops and allow their school to rake in millions of dollars are owed something.

      Yes, it's unfair. Yes, it's not rewarding academic achievement. But it's utilizing the same principles that any other business does when deciding how to split the pie—you pay people according to their value.

      "Lets be honest, guys that go to college for just one year don't go to class very often because they don't need to. So why should we reward the kids that don't go to class and make the kid who made a 1400 on his SAT pay thousands of dollars to attend college."

      I hate to say it, but kids who get a 1400 on their SAT are a dime a dozen—and their is nothing inherent about a SAT score (that I can see at least) that directly generates millions of dollars in revenue for your school.

      "Lets not forget, this is college, the purpose is suppose to be to get an education and sports are secondary."

      True, but keep in mind that the absurd amount of dollars that college football and hoops can bring into a University CAN THEN BE USED to build new classrooms, housing for students (including academic-minded ones), hire more professors, etc. Top quality athletes can then be said to INCREASE A SCHOOL'S ACADEMIC RESOURCES through the revenue they help generate.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  12. Taylor Gram 12 months ago

    too many things would come off of this, like" pay students for good grades 'cause their working just as hard as them basketball boys"/. Wouldn't that be the same thing?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  13. Shaun Ahmad 12 months ago

    A free education is more than enough reward for playing a sport. If you're not good enough to go pro, make sure you graduate. Coming out of college with a degree and no debt is a step up over the vast majority of college grads in this country.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      Yes it is, but these athletes are creating a lot more money for their schools than the vast majority of college grads!

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

    • Shaun Ahmad 12 months ago

      But then if you start paying them, where do you draw the line. At least when you have a professional league with 30 teams, it is easier to control salaries and player movement. What happens if every school starts paying their athletes? The best players would go to the schools with the most money. What happens with transfers? When you have over 100 programs involved, and as many athletes as there are, things could get REALLY messy.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  14. Alex Boylhart 12 months ago

    College athletes are already paid. Its called scholarships, free meals, free housing, free tutoring, and a free education. They get jobs, anything they need to make their lives easier. Paying them on top of that is ridiculous. That is how they earn their education and gain exposure for their future, they are getting enough out of it.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Hoss 12 months ago

      Right on Alex.

      I played football at a Big Ten school a long time ago. I got free room and board, books, tutors, the ability as a freshman (and so on) to kick a senior out of a class if I needed it to fit my time schedule, and lots of other perks. I also got a great education and the ability to walk away from my undergrad degree without owing a cent, unlike almost all of my friends who owed tens of thousands of dollars.

      And yes, the general student population will be the ones getting screwed if players get paid. Despite this report, all athletic departments aren't solvent; just ask the students at Indiana University who had a "temporary" athletic fee that they had to pay to keep afloat.

      And I'll ask: who is going to decide the sliding-scale for what the players get paid; Do you pay them up front based on forecast revenue (what happens if they get hurt), and their expectations; Do you pay them a percentage on the back-end after costs have been covered; etc., good luck with all that.

      And you may want to read Title IX, especially that little "no person ....shall be denied the benefits" clause if you don't think the women will be wanting theirs too.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  15. Michael Collins 12 months ago

    Thanks, Boyce, for your article and your viewpoint, which I respect. I can keep my responses to a comment this time.

    First, a couple of corrections - the $200,000 I mentioned was for four years of a full scholarship to a non-state school. I gave Syracuse and Notre Dame as examples. And football players may get a fifth year.
    Second, I did not mention the NCAA once. So, I did not argue how "the NCAA is ultimately protecting the athletes...." as you represented one of my arguments.
    I apologize if I was unclear.

    My article link: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/29981-counterpoint-a-scholarship-is-more-than-enough-for-college-athletes

    My main point was football and basketball do not exist in a financial vaccuum either within a university which needs to fund non-revenue generating sports, including Title IX sports, or within the NCAA framework, which has BCS and non-BCS schools. Many, many athletes receive an education and college degree, which over a lifetime will earn them $1 million more than non-graduates. How many of those will not get scholarships due to colleges cutting programs, including black colleges unable to fund sports programs?

    Football (v. basketball) requires more time to develop skills, bulk up in strength and conditioning programs before players are competitive, though both are the main revenue-generating sports programs. With the free market as a guideline, how do you value the different athletes on their productivity? What is a college's commitment if a player is no longer productive? Injured or on the second or third team and never develops as expected? How should athletes from high school who need to develop skills and size reimburse their coaches and colleges?

    To look at those individual student-athletes in two sports and how much money they generate for a school neglects looking at the entire picture across all sports at a university, the college lifespan of that athlete, and BCS, non-BCS and D-IAA schools could be impacted.

    As an aside, do you think Bleacher should pay its writers based on those that generate the most income?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  1. Alex Ferguson 12 months ago

    Absolutely no way. I went to a US school for two years (I'm actually from the UK), and going to college was a five figure issue.

    So why pay college players? They will get school for free- and if you're good (like Paul Posluszny at Penn State, who studied business), you can get a superb education. After, doesn't the NFL stand for Not For Long?

    I'm also against it because these guys - if they are good enough - will make millions and millions of dollars in their rookie years. Let's not feel too sorry for them for not getting paid to play in college.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  2. James Hulka 12 months ago

    Interesting points made, but there are plenty of flaws in the reasoning here. The most notable being that most college athletes don't make it to the professional ranks in sports, and how can you determine which ones get paid and which ones don't. The ones who you prefer get paid wouldn't stay for the whole 4 years, and there's quite a few who wouldn't follow through with the academic side of their scholarship terms and do the work necessary to graduate like anyone else. Case in point - a free ride to college is worth about $100,000 over four years, and they get the experience and the education and the ability to get a job in their major field after they graduate. And you suggest they deserve MORE?!?! Simply put - they haven't earned it. If you say the one-year basketball players and the football players who don't go to class deserve to get paid, then why not the swimmer who's having just as much practice time, still goes to class, wins, does his work, but no one ever hears of him unless he goes to the Olympics or National or World Championships? Simply because he's not on TV you're saying he can't get paid, but the basketball guy who takes 2 joke classes and never attends does? Forget it. Bad idea then, bad idea now. Too many of these publicized college athletes don't think they need to get an education at all, let alone in college. THAT is the problem.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Zander Freund 12 months ago

      I agree that the most difficult part of paying college athletes from a practical standpoint would be determining who should make what. It could very much discourage team ball if you paid according to stats or notoriety. I think you'd have to divide the pie relatively evenly for it to work...

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  3. Matt Gard 12 months ago

    So if the player is going to Indiana and is out-of-state, you're saying that the $80,000+ value of attending a four-year institution and living expenses, not to mention special attention, academic tutoring and probably special treatment just isn't enough?

    What if they go to Notre Dame? $160,000 for four years worth of tuition alone? That's not enough?

    What about the intangibles? The player goes to school for four years, gets injured their rookie season in the pros and has to get a REAL job. The training they got school for FREE because they were blessed with talent wasn't enough?

    And if we pay college athletes, do we take academic scholarships away from people who aren't athletes but could be the future movers and shakers of America? Can THEY do without scholarships? Some of them can. What will the others do?

    It's not an issue of whether or not they can afford to do it. It's an issue of who are they screwing over in order to do it?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  4. John McClory 12 months ago

    O.J. Mayo with a pocket full of cash -- what could go wrong?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  5. Michael Schlossberg 12 months ago

    first of all that article was amazing... you completely changed my view on if they should get paid... but I have one problem and it is from an ESPN Classic Documentary "5 reasons you can't blame the NCAA for not Paying Athletes". and it is simple, the big powerhouses, particularly in Football such as Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St. can lure players by offering the most amount of money.... if there was a way to alleviate that than I'm all for paying the NCAA athletes instead of stealing from them... but as an Arizona student I am angry that Jennings didn't come play for us...

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  6. Peter Hamburger 12 months ago

    What a disgutingly cynical interpretation of college athletes' motivation for playing intercollegiate sports. Only for a "payment" of tuition, a salary, a slave wage. For someone that considers himself a warrior for the exploited, a voice for the underrepresented, you have a very patronizing and simplistic view of their reasoning. The "soft bigotry of low expectations," indeed.

    Aside from the ~$50,000 in value of private tuition, room and board (which at some schools is exceptionally luxurious for athletes with respect to their peers), books, meals plans, trunk loads of university-issued clothing, and hours of private tutoring, they gain a life-time of enhanced income and personal development that you discount out of hand. They're just there to "get paid", right Boyce?

    In fact, the vast majority of college football and basketball players have no dream of a career in the sport, and no thought of their school as a minor league. Many of them never even letter for the school, but use their hard-earned degrees to make far more money than they ever contributed to the school as athletes. What should happen to them? In your suggested "free market" for athletes, should they be forced to pay back their scholarships (not to mention an supplementary income) for every year they don't play and contribute to the coffers? As you said yourself, it's the OJ Mayos that are really producing for the school, so shouldn't they be pullin' in the dough while the non-players get the scraps. After all, that's all they're at the school to do, right Boyce?

    And this is to say nothing of the fact that probably only a few dozen schools, at most, make any money off basketball. Should they be forced to cough up salaries, too, so they can compete with the highly-paid superstars at money-making schools like North Carolina and Kansas? Oh, that's right, they should just give it up if the cash isn't rolling in, according to you. School spirit, unity and the solicitation of donations be damned. Me thinks you haven't thought this through.

    Try harder.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  7. Chris Lenz 12 months ago

    They ARE getting paid. they're getting free (or significantly reduced) college educations.

    It's not MY fault that they're too narcissistic and nearsighted to take advantage of a good thing.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  8. Rufus Navarro 12 months ago

    y'all justjealous if you think theys shouldnt be payed

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  9. Jim Fisk 12 months ago

    This article is excellent. Colleges have a nasty habit of doing anti-competitive behavior that would put anyone else in the slammer, and justifying it on the grounds of fairness or altruism. Remember when the Ivy League schools and the Little Three were caught by the Justice Department in the 1980s fixing the price of tuition and scholarships? They signed a consent decree and said they wouldn't do it anymore, but no one paid the price for it. Yes, they were literally meeting in the Berkshires every year and agreeing on how much each would raise tuition, so that they could raise tuition at twice the rate of inflation for decades on end, and so that every student would be offered a financial aid package exactly equal to every other college in the cartel. Their justification was that students shouldn't pick colleges based on which ones offered them more financial aid, they instead should pick colleges based on which was a better fit for what they were interested in. A trifle paternalistic, no? And, very illegal, but the colleges justified it to themselves. The NCAA's behavior is part of that same pattern. Colleges and universities believe that the usual rules don't apply to them.

    On the same vein, remember when the NCAA was sued by the NIT for anti-competitive behavior, and won? Under the 1981 “Commitment to Participate Rule” (CPR), if a team at a NCAA-member school is invited to participate in a NCAA post-season tournament, that team must participate in that tournament or it may not participate in any post-season tournament whatsoever. The rule was implemented by the NCAA because in the 1970s, Al McGuire and Marquette accepted an invitation to the NIT instead of to March Madness, and the NCAA decided that simply wouldn't do. After years of litigation, the NCAA purchased the NIT for $40.5 million, and paid another $16 million to settle the litigation. This is the same NCAA that today says it cannot afford to fairly compensate its professional athletes!

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  10. IRISHsubway FAN 12 months ago

    Are you serious?!? I usually try my best to be objective and read both arguments without pride or prejudice. But paying student-athletes?!? The statement alone is a contradiction in itself. These kids are recieving top notch educations from, in some cases, top rated universities. Notre Dame, USC, scUM, Purdue, the list goes on and on. Most business students would give a lung to attend any of these schools that these kids are giving a 100% free ride to. I still get angry when I find out that Dennis Dixon took Billiards 101 in his 5th year or Matt Leinart with Ballroom Dancing, but that;s neither here nor there. They get free room and board, and I think a college football player gets enough food to eat to maintain proper nutrition standards. What would you pay them for? Entertainment? These schools use this money they get for academics, future scholarships, to athletes and outstanding students alike, and to pay staff the money they deserve to teach. As a student-athlete of any university, you have been recognized as a person with exceptional athletic abilities and are given the opportunity to use those gifts to obtain a free education from an institute of higher learning, which is what they are, not professional sport vocational schools. I do not feel bad that these athletes are not compensated financially, which I believe to a small degree, they are, nor do I believe that they should be in any way, shape, or form. No one is arguing that students at medical schools trying to cure diseases should be paid, so why should we hold student-athletes to a higher standard?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  11. Chris Hoeler 12 months ago

    Also, if u start paying student athletes out of the college's pockets, then tuition is going to go up for people who are trying to go to college to get an education and it will make it that much harder for kids that may be smart, but don't have the financial means to get through college. Tuition is high enough as it is. The athletes should be happy that they don't have to pay thousands of dollars in college tuition.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  12. Tiffany Davies 12 months ago

    As a college student at a tradition laden basketball powerhouse (Indiana...until Sampson came around), I cannot justify athletes getting paid for their performances. They're getting free tuition to these schools, tuition that I'm struggling to pay for despite the fact I've got massive academic scholarships, merchandise, trips, everything. If these guys deserve to get paid for their performances on the court, then I should get paid for my performance in the classroom...and I'm not talking an extra thousand on my grant money either. C'mon now guys...it's just ridiculous.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  13. Spenser T. Harrison 12 months ago

    They already are paid. A scholarship is essentially being paid to attend a school. They get free food, room, and education; which most of them don't use. And we can't forget all the under the table money they receive.

    No Soup for them.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  14. Michael Inglis 12 months ago

    It's college athletics, these are STUDENT athletes.

    Should we pay high school athletes too? High school sports are more competitive than ever.

    ONe of the biggest problems is schools will monopolies and create dynasties. We will never see Boise State, or Utah go undefeated in football again. Forget about mid majors in the NCAA tounarment, those days will be over too. It will dimish the wide variety of competition.

    Zander you think only athletes should be paid because they are creating significant revenue for their school.

    These kids are getting the money through the school facilties. A lot of these big name division 1 schools are like small cities.

    The money you are using to play these athletes comes from where? Which program should take a hit so a guy who never attends class (usually for the one and done basketball player) can get paid? Maybe the science department, or the law school, you pick.

    You're missing the entire point of what college is for. They aren't there to play sports, they're suppose to be there to get an education. For the star athlete the school is giving them a big stage to showcase their talents and market themselves to scouts. Then after a year or two they will get paid.

    How are you going to determine how much the player gets paid, is it based on the amount of revenue the individual brings in? If so, then don't go to play basketball for Duke, or football for Bama, because regardless of rather those schools have been good or bad the place is always sold out.

    Im as big a sports fan as any, but college is for an education not to get paid. If you're only interested in the money go play in Europe like Jennings is doing.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  15. Hoss 12 months ago

    How many programs would opt-out of a sport rather than lose money paying athletes? So, many students would lose the opportunity at a free-ride education at the expense of the others getting paid. So, is it about the lofty notion of being a student-athlete, or is it purely dollars. Because let's face it - many of the athletes couldn't get into their schools under general admissions, and maybe the regular student has a grievance there because that athlete is watering-down the strength of their diplomas. So, should they just then skip the whole "scholar" part of student-scholar?

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  1. Kirk Mango 12 months ago

    How sad to see such a suggestion. Very superficial. I will not bother reiterating all the reasons why paying college athletes is a bad idea (not the least of which is the poor message that it would send), most all have been covered with sound justification already by those opposed to such a suggestion. What I will say is this; I was a scholarship athlete - that reward (and the education I received) was compensation enough. My oldest daughter was a scholarship athlete - again the compensation and education was fitting for the efforts put in. My youngest daughter is on scholarship - same story, she is receiving plenty reward for her efforts as well. Anyone who tells you different has their priorities askew.

    As a young athlete, would I have loved to be paid on top of my scholarship? Sure!!! From a strictly financial standpoint, would it be great to see both of my kids paid a salary in addition to what they received and are receiving? You bet!!! Now ask me if I believe that is the right thing to do and in the best interest of athletes, schools, and all others. No, not a good idea!!!

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  2. Michael Inglis 12 months ago

    Think about it if you play football at the University of Miami. With tution and room and board it's over 41,000 dollars. They are basically just handing out 41,000 dollars to athletes in scholarships.

    That sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  3. James McPhate 12 months ago

    The student-athlete term is nice, but let's be real. They are athletes.

    I don't buy the free education thing. AT LEAST half of the college football and basketball players (money sports) would not be in college if it weren't for sports. The kids who play college athletics and want an education will get it, the rest are there to do their time and hopefully go pro. The free education means nothing to a player who was raised in a home where education was not valued. That's another issue in itself. When I see an athlete in class that doesn't try as hard as he can, sort of diminishing that free ride, I don't get mad. They help generate millions for the school, I don't.

    Paying players would reduce some of the dirty recruiting tactics that are still prevelant today.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  4. Alan Bass 12 months ago

    This is an extremely well written article, Bryce. You make an unbelievably good point here. Players like Donte Green who would easily choose NBA over college because of the money and fame. I agree with you so much.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Jameson Fleming 12 months ago

      Donte' Greene should have pulled a Brandon Jennings and gone to Germany for a year (where he was born). As much as I enjoyed him on campus for the year he would have been better off over seas.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  5. Carter . 12 months ago

    they should be paid if theyre in a business...college sports is not a business is just playing competitively in the college level. They should only be paid if theyre professionals, these guys arent pros, their amateurs.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  6. jim mcrt 12 months ago

    for every 2 players you would think deserve pay there are 20 who are greatly compensated with an education and no professional career

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  7. Brendan Majev 12 months ago

    I would have to say that the idea of paying college athletes is disgusting. Here's a thought- not all college athletes go pro. Okay, that's accurate... should those players be compensated?

    Probably not, because unless they are good enough to go pro they probably weren't the ones raking in the money for their school. And even if they were, they're in school to get an education. A signing bonus exists in pro contracts in case of injury, so those players don't have to get a real job like everyone else. If they make money for the school, that's great! I'm a college athlete- admittedly at a D3 school, but I take great pride in my program's accomplishments and my school. I want it to be as good as it can be... isn't that the same with anyone who graduated from OSU? Didn't Eddie George show up at the OSU-UM game when they were #1 and #2 a couple of years ago because he still took pride in his school (played for OSU)?

    Look, in terms of "free market value" these players CAN make money, and they don't "make" as much as they could. But that's only the case for a small minority of players; the rest are just typical collegiate athletes.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  8. Stuart Mahoney 12 months ago

    Well, I personally don't believe that NCAA players should be paid per se, but I do feel that they should still be getting a little additional compensation for all their time and effort. I'm thinking that players on a team as a whole should get a percentage (perhaps about 1%) of the revenue their sport brings to the school and split it evenly amongst all the players of the team. Even though it is true that not all of these (in fact most won't) will go pro, they still all contribute to the team in some way or another. Also, while I'm not totally sure about this, I'm of the understanding that the players aren't allowed to work for money even in non-sports related occupations. If I understand that correctly, I feel that is just flat-out wrong, as I don't see why they shouldn't have the opprotunity to work like everyone else, especially if they can still keep up with their sports and scholastic obligations. This is particularly concerning to me for the majority of athletes who WON'T go pro, as they're going to need to collect real-world work experience and internships and so forth so they can go on with their lives after they graduate from college.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

    • Peter Hamburger 12 months ago

      "I'm of the understanding that the players aren't allowed to work for money even in non-sports related occupations."

      Not correct. During my time in college I knew of a number of football players that were employed in typical student jobs across campus, some for simple involvement with campus life, some for the work experience, and some simply for spending money. I believe one even worked in the dining hall/cafeteria. I certainly know of an even greater number that have held summer internships; one '07 ND defensive back interned with a major Wall Street investment bank last Summer, and is employed there now.

      College athletes are allowed benefits, just not "extra" benefits that derive from their statuses as athletes. For example, they can't use their likeness as an athlete to promote a good or service for compensation. These are things that wouldn't be available to a regular student, so they're denied from the student-athlete, too.

      Edit Comment Cancel

      Reply
      Great Comment (
      0
      )

  9. Bob Richards 12 months ago

    Student/Athletes on scholarship are being paid with the cost of Room & Board, tuition, and many more perks not offered to the standard student. Better meals, clothes, Sunday meal tickets, etc are on the table for them. Hey, if college life and the way it is now is not what they want head to the pros and sign a contract here or outside of the USA and quit your bitchin......no one is holding a gun to make anyone go to school under the rules as they are!

    Schools from grade through college certainly do make money off of their students on the court, field or in the auditorium with plays and performances.....what the heck do you think pays for all the costs associated with games and performances.....your tax dollars don't come close to paying for it all!

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  10. dave jenkins 12 months ago

    college athletes getting paid is absolutely ridiculous. In this day and age that would be the dumbest move. I agree with many on here that state that they are getting paid with the reward of free education/room and board but that's just the half of it.

    Let's say I'm a stud point gaurd at a smaller school(good example-Stephon Curry of Davidson) and I'm getting paid 65K to play but there's a kid at USC with less talent but he is making 80K. The bigger schools can pay the fatter checks and that's not right. Then the bitchin' and moanin' would begin just like it does at the professional level when athletes compare their salaries with others' in the league so they can push for bigger salaries. We would have a bunch of 18 and 19 year old cry babies running around driving Range Rovers, wearing gold chains and getting a free education.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  11. Dustin Haley 12 months ago

    Sooner or later people are going to have to realize that no matter what you do you will always be making someone / some organization money. It's always going to be significantly more than your compensations. It is the way of the world.

    While I understand the concepts of paying student athletes, we are only talking only high profile athletes. I think the revenue generated by these athletes for their respective schools should be used for various fundings and research. While coaches and brass of universites do reap high rewards, they have established themselves as respected professionals in their expertise. High school athletes have not.

    College sports is not a developmental league, not in the eyes of the NCAA. Although the professional leagues use it as one. These students are being given tools to make themselves successful businessmen in their professional careers.

    "Again, simplicity is key: OJ Mayo plays for USC. USC earns an extra $30 million due to the presence of OJ Mayo on their basketball team. OJ Mayo’s mother has the right to negotiate at least $10 million dollars of her son’s contribution to the campus."

    If we start paying these athletes, these colleges will now want to protect and keep their big investments. We would start to see contracts. We would see a complete restructuring of NCAA elegiblity rules. Effectively making the NCAA a professional league. Thus negating the reason professional sports prefer athletes to play in college. I think this would hurt the NCAA fanbase in the long run.

    Goodbye Tradition
    Goodbye Diversity
    Goodbye Conferences

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  12. John Radford 12 months ago

    How can you possibly teach economics when you clearly don't understand (or more likely refuse to admit) that the vast majority of Division 1 universities athletic departments cannot earn a PROFIT? Profit. Not "earning miilions" which you say ad nauseam. Generating money is different than making money. I agree that coaches salaries are excessive, but even if they weren't, we'd still have 75% of D1 schools susidizing their athletic departments. I swear to God I read your piece three times and almost none of it makes coherent sense of is based on objective reality. You obviously have an inherant bias against college sports which you don't feel free enough to honestly discuss. College sports and the NCAA is far from perfect, but they're not slave owners. This is not the women's sufferage from the early twentieth century and you're not John Updike. Lastly, why did you waste all those words condemming the entirety of D1 sports when you could have advocated in 50 words or less than the whole system should be chucked in favor of what the Ivy League system? Lastly, what does this propose to mean?:

    “Why is it the job of the guys on the football and basketball team to fund all the sports across campus, when coaches, administrators and wealthy commentators are not forced to share their salaries? Do we feel it is OK to fund this subsidy with money from the athletes and not anyone else? Is there a Title IX for coaches so that the female basketball coach earns the same as the men’s coach? ”

    Where else would important non-revenue sports get their money or their existence from? Are you actually being cynical and saying the hell with them? That's pretty selfish.

    John
    The University of Florida

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  13. Greg Cooksey 12 months ago

    I am not totally agianst paying college thletes, however, let's get realistic here. The truth of the matter is that unless a student is coming from a rough less fourtunate invorment no of these kids are in a dyier situation. They are not going out and haveing a expensive dinner at Mortons steak house all the time.
    Most likely they are like anyother college student eating pizza, subs, orwhatever kind of inexpesnive food that tastes good to them. You have to remeber that when a child recives a scholarship they are basically being paid to go to school. I would have no problem with universities sitting down and figuring out away to maybe pay a kid what a minimum wadge job does so the have the opportunity to be able to go out and buy the occasional video game or DVD

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  14. Greg Cooksey 12 months ago

    I am not totally agianst paying college thletes, however, let's get realistic here. The truth of the matter is that unless a student is coming from a rough less fourtunate invorment no of these kids are in a dyier situation. They are not going out and haveing a expensive dinner at Mortons steak house all the time.
    Most likely they are like anyother college student eating pizza, subs, orwhatever kind of inexpesnive food that tastes good to them. You have to remeber that when a child recives a scholarship they are basically being paid to go to school. I would have no problem with universities sitting down and figuring out away to maybe pay a kid what a minimum wadge job does so the have the opportunity to be able to go out and buy the occasional video game or DVD

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

  15. Stuart Mahoney 12 months ago

    Thanks for clarifying that, Peter...I wasn't sure exactly how that worked. I stand corrected.

    Edit Comment Cancel

    Reply
    Great Comment (
    0
    )

Leave a Comment

  • You must register to post a comment.

    • About the Author Boyce Watkins (scribe)

    • 2 articles written
    • 0 comments posted
    • 6 fans

    Want to write for Bleacher Report

    We are a community of fans who write about sports. And we're growing.

    Learn More and Sign Up »

    Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Getty Images.
    Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Getty Images is strictly prohibited.