Paying College Athletes

College sports is a big business, especially in men's football and basketball. Many athletes go to college on a full or partial scholarship, which in a way is compensation for the student. However, not all of the players who play on a team get a scholarship. Some colleges use the players as part of very lucrative deals with sponsors but the players are prohibited from signing with a sponsor during college.

Is this a fair situation?

Yang says the situation is immoral while Tebow says students should not be paid. I am going to go with Yang on this one.

Comments (120)

Sep 16, 2019

I think there are 2 perspectives from this.

First should a large MNC align themselves with some college kid who nowadays could be on the hook for just about anything. I think that might be alot of risk companies may not want to take.

Second if a college student takes offers, what do the contracts look like. I think at the end if the day you don't want to athletes with no leverage into crap deals.

I'm always on the fence about this one.

Sep 16, 2019

Lets pay them in COCAINE and HOOKERS

    • 2
    • 1
Funniest
Sep 17, 2019

let's be real, they already get free blow from cheerleaders, and cocaine.

Most Helpful
Sep 16, 2019

If college sports was pasttime for stressed students and viewed as amateurs just enjoying the game on the side of studying, then I would say, no they should not be paid.

But realistically, the entire institution of college sports is a bullshit show. The "donor" ticket pricing, tv rights, sponsorships, merch, etc, is just a giant business. Coaches are making bazookoo bucks in college sports. The athletes should absolutely be paid.

    • 9
    • 1
Sep 16, 2019

I agree and what about the kid who did not get a scholarship but is forced to wear the logos of the corporate sponsor?

Learn More

Side-by-side comparison of top modeling training courses + exclusive discount through WSO here.

Sep 21, 2019
Billion with a B:

If college sports was pasttime for stressed students and viewed as amateurs just enjoying the game on the side of studying, then I would say, no they should not be paid.

But realistically, the entire institution of college sports is a bullshit show. The "donor" ticket pricing, tv rights, sponsorships, merch, etc, is just a giant business. Coaches are making bazookoo bucks in college sports. The athletes should absolutely be paid.

This is the correct answer. All others--mine included--are less correct than this answer.

Sep 16, 2019

Why do college athletes deserve a salary when they have a free scholarship for an education. If you want to get paid, go professional.

"It's okay, I'll see you on the other side"

    • 1
    • 6
Sep 16, 2019

Because we are a capitalist society. Suddenly capitalism is bad if some kid wants to make money off his likeness or personal brand?

    • 4
    • 1
Sep 16, 2019

Not all of them get a scholarship. Why should coaches and the institutions get paid hundreds of millions when players get paid very little?

    • 1
Sep 16, 2019

If you a pay $100+ to watch some college kid play basketball and pay $9 for a 12 ounce of beer, go ahead, the same is available on TV for basically nothing and you can drink for cheaper. Supply and Demand.

"It's okay, I'll see you on the other side"

    • 1
Sep 21, 2019
Funx2192:

If you a pay $100+ to watch some college kid play basketball and pay $9 for a 12 ounce of beer, go ahead, the same is available on TV for basically nothing and you can drink for cheaper. Supply and Demand.

I see what you're saying, but this isn't a pure supply/demand situation. Almost no 18-19-year-old is athletic/strong/refined enough to play professional American football, so there is one monopoly option, which is college sports. With one option, supply and demand is distorted by the monopoly situaiton.

Sep 17, 2019

Because some leagues require some sort of (realistic) participation in NCAA before admittance into said league. NBA for example, playing one year of international ball is not realistic for most 18 year olds coming out of high school.

Also, most sports even at the D1 level are non-revenue generating. A school's men's football and basketball team will fund all other sports and far more for their university. It is those football and basketball athletes funding the tennis, swim and dive, golf, cross country, soccer, and other programs for their school (not even going to mention the academic programs).

Not all college athletes should be getting paid. But the athletes bringing in the $$$? Absolutely

-Former non-revenue generating D1 athlete

    • 4
    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

Do you even know the schedule for a student athlete? They are absolutely not receiving an education. In fact, there is a high chance he/she did not even have the grades to be there in the first place. Lastly, the scholarship is negligible compared to the amount of money they are generating for their schools. How would you feel if someone was making millions off a jersey with your name on it, and you received nothing? This is modern day slave labour.

    • 1
    • 2
Sep 20, 2019

I have to disagree with you on this one. I am a student-athlete at a big state school. My schedule goes like this.

6 am - 7am: Gym/Conditioning
8 am - noon: Classes
noon - 12.45 pm: Lunch
1 pm - 6 pm: Practice/Film
7 pm - 11 pm: stu-DYING + dinner or frat stuff
11 pm - whenever: dicking around

im a computer information systems and finance double major and im definitely getting a pretty good education too. (superdays at MS/BlackRock/GS)

i think being a student-athlete is demanding but it is definitely rewarding.

    • 2
Sep 20, 2019

LOL that had to hurt.

"Do you even know the schedule for a student athlete? They are absolutely not receiving an education."

"I am an athlete with two hard majors and doing great at school & recruiting."

Walk it off @bluegold. You'll be sore for a couple days so take it easy. Lots of ice and rest.

    • 2
Sep 21, 2019
bluegold:

Do you even know the schedule for a student athlete? They are absolutely not receiving an education. In fact, there is a high chance he/she did not even have the grades to be there in the first place. Lastly, the scholarship is negligible compared to the amount of money they are generating for their schools. How would you feel if someone was making millions off a jersey with your name on it, and you received nothing? This is modern day slave labour.

98% in agreement. The only caveat I would add is that we, of all people, need to recognize that revenue is meaningless. The vast majority of major college sports programs don't turn profits (I think only 20(?) programs do). If these weren't non-profits, they'd be out of business in about 2 seconds.

Sep 16, 2019

I love capitalism. How is this going to work though. Would you pay extra money to watch someone play when you can watch on T.V for basically free. Would you rather pay money to watch N.B.A or would you rather watch some college/university play basketball.

"It's okay, I'll see you on the other side"

Sep 16, 2019

Just don't block them from making money.

If Johnny Manziel wants to sell his autograph let him.

    • 2
Sep 16, 2019

What if the value of the autograph goes basically to zero? How can you decide or value what the worth of a signature is worth.

"It's okay, I'll see you on the other side"

Sep 17, 2019

I strongly prefer watching college sports to professional ones at least for basketball and football. I really, really don't give a shit about the NBA or NFL, but I quite like college basketball and football. When we're talking about paying college athletes, those are the only two sports in consideration. Every other sport is a loss-making enterprise for virtually every college. As it is, all the athletes on scholarships playing sports that lose money should be regularly blowing the football and basketball teams. While we're at it, the coaches, trainers, doctors, groundskeepers, fundraisers, athletic directors and everyone else making a living off those kids should be regularly blowing them. But since we can't mandate blowjobs, compensation seems fair.

Let's be honest here, does a kid on a scholarship for fencing contribute the same thing to the university as a star football player? Objectively, they don't. Even if the fencer were to become an Olympic champion, no one would know his name. No one would ever pay $200 for a ticket to watch him perform. And the benefits to the university are pretty clearly outweighed by the costs of running the program (not just scholarship costs, but travel costs, coaching salaries, trainers, etc.). As evidenced by the fact that the fencing coach gets paid very little while the football coach gets paid millions, the fencing program is essentially a charity case for the college while the football program is not.

To be clear, the guy who originally created the 'student athlete' defense to argue that the players are 'students first, athletes second' now thinks that is pure nonsense. He created that argument in the 1960s when college athletes really were amateurs. They're not today. But even if they were amateurs, their performances are at the core of a multi-billion dollar industry. That's obviously worth something--it's worth more than the performances of athletes in other sports. Right now, they're all paid the same (scholarships only). That's socialism. If you (as you say) 'love capitalism' you should be against it.

    • 6
Sep 17, 2019
brotherbear:

Right now, they're all paid the same (scholarships only).

Scholarship != pay, it just means their tuition bill at the end of the semester reads $0.

Sep 20, 2019

I see what you're trying to say, but you're missing a huge part of your own argument. The TV deals that the colleges ink with ESPN, NBC, ABC, etc. are worth MILLIONS of dollars that go directly to the conference (SEC,Big 10, ACC, etc.), which then goes to th school. So while the fact that you're arguing that you could watch for "free" at home may be true in principle, it is also true that the college athlete i the reason that the TV revenue (which again is a GIANT part of the rev. generated for the school) is only available due to the un-paid college players.

Sep 16, 2019

What about if you paid them, the NCAA just abolished scholarships. So we'll pay you, but you have to pay to come here.

Sep 16, 2019

Honestly feel like this would be the better route. They could easily just make the team selection more stringent, have just a general team pay rate which helps all players afford coming to school, and incrementally increase pay based on play time, individual performance, team rank etc.

Sep 16, 2019

Absolutely. College football is big money.

Sep 16, 2019

How much would you pay the women's water polo team?

Sep 17, 2019

I'm on the fence with this one but the main two perspectives are :

No, don't pay athletes who have the opportunity to graduate debt free when millions of other students who are studying much harder majors and are in the same or worse socio economic position. I partially agree to this in way because everyone knows that the typical NCAA athlete isn't looking to get into a prestigious HF role out of college and literally only has one job in college which is to play and get the minimum requirement for passing. They get exemptions from assignments and aren't ever given the same deadlines as the normal students so it creates a bit of annoyance when you're drowning in calculus and some WR on the football team is putting in 2 hours per week to pass intro to sociology. With that said, they are dreaming of making millions and playing in front of the world so i suppose it makes sense for the top 5 star athletes on Bama, OU, Clemson or any other powerhouse team that have a pipeline to the pros to not care about thinking about working for GS.

Yes, pay students who are being broadcasted and are being profited off by ESPN, ABC etc because they have a basic human right that should enable them to use their own name and image as a money generating product. I agree on the premise but it really begins to engage in a slippery slope here due to the fact that inequality between 3 star and 5 star teams are already vast and now with the introduction of pay it can create a lot of economic issues for teams that are not in a big market and ultimately could be the end of small underdog college teams. I guess watching Texas A&M against North Alaska state isn't fun but i think it benefits both programs with the indirect benefits far outweighing tv ratings and the final score. Now with the small teams gone it goes from 100 teams to Top 50 with every game being highly competitive and becomes extremely dull after just watching the great teams play with no chance at any diversity to see if FSU can somehow still lose by 35 to Blue Mountain State.

Overall i think players should get paid but limit it to a specific cap similar to the NFL, for example the max offer is 50k per year or something like that so it doesn't create situations where UM offers 200 k , a turnover chain and a free frat house bid whilst Georgia Southern offer 25k and a ticket to a Florida Georgia line concert (Good band btw) . I doubt the NCAA can do anything right anymore due to their bullshit but if they could somehow regulate the money then it would help answer the underlying problem.

    • 2
Sep 17, 2019

First off, most college students who are athletes and marketable are on a full ride. That said, for huge stars, like Jalen Hurts, Tua T or Trevor Lawrence, it's unfair...millions are made on their personas.

This is an incredibly slippery slope. I believe that everyone should be compensated fairly, and the NCAA is a BS regulatory body that will continue to f it up until it is eventually disbanded.

I was a scholarship athlete in a very random sport, cycling. I had a partial scholarship but was also allowed sponsorship money because USA Cycling manages college cycling and not the NCAA. I had a couple of teammates who were monsters who became multiple time Olympians and making a few hundred thousand per year in school as pros, but they could still race for our college.

You can't play in the NFL and college football at the same time so my context is not relevant, but it should t be this complicated.

Sep 17, 2019

Pay vs compensation is my big issue here.

Give scholarships and a good education. Above that "pay" them with food, housing, and perhaps a monthly spending stipend...

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is whether or not there should even be major college sports. If you want to pay athletes then we might as well just have a minor league for football and basketball and get rid of the sham that is the NCAA.

Those sports are already a joke in a university setting considering the average test scores and GPAs of those students are generally well below the average levels for admittance to their respective institutions. And once there the big time programs all have round the clock tutors for the teams even while many athletes take the easiest classes available. There arent many engineering or physics majors on the basketball and football teams.

Just get rid of college sports.

    • 1
    • 2
Sep 17, 2019
Pmc2ghy:

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is whether or not there should even be major college sports. If you want to pay athletes then we might as well just have a minor league for football and basketball and get rid of the sham that is the NCAA.

Those sports are already a joke in a university setting considering the average test scores and GPAs of those students are generally well below the average levels for admittance to their respective institutions. And once there the big time programs all have round the clock tutors for the teams even while many athletes take the easiest classes available. There arent many engineering or physics majors on the basketball and football teams.

Just get rid of college sports.

Unless you spin off the NCAA into a standalone institution, what you're saying seems pretty unrealistic. Even then, seems like the Universities will keep some interest and the league would retain its likeness.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

I don't think the question is "are athletes the most academically inclined". Yes athletes gain certain privileges but the university makes millions and millions of dollars off of their likeness. Scholarships are great but what about the players who can't afford to eat or pay rent? If you're a normal person and your skills are worth millions to a company but you get paid minimum wage, nobody will say "Well you have enough to eat and live right?" It's all about being able to profit from the worth you're creating.

Sep 17, 2019

I mean, I know sports is a vehicle for some of these students to get out of certain situations. But, if they can't afford to eat/live, should the school be expected to pay for that? Maybe the road to professional sports should be more open for kids going directly from high school.

Its similar to the divide between wealthy families that have the money to allow their kids to take unpaid internships vs lower income families where the kid actually has to work.

Sep 19, 2019
Pmc2ghy:

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is whether or not there should even be major college sports. If you want to pay athletes then we might as well just have a minor league for football and basketball and get rid of the sham that is the NCAA.

Those sports are already a joke in a university setting considering the average test scores and GPAs of those students are generally well below the average levels for admittance to their respective institutions. And once there the big time programs all have round the clock tutors for the teams even while many athletes take the easiest classes available. There arent many engineering or physics majors on the basketball and football teams.

Just get rid of college sports.

The time commitment for college sports is outrageous, most people can't have "hard" majors while being a full-time athlete. Let's make this clear: being a college athlete is a full time job. Rarely will you get someone intelligent enough to get solid grades as a physics major and maintain a position as a college athlete. I had a buddy that made the track team at college but had to quit because he couldn't maintain his pre-med course load and do it. Another got into an ivy as a football player and was doing engineering but switched to business b/c he didn't have enough time to study. Tutors lol, when you have to attend class then practice for ~30 hours a week who gives a shit about tutors.

    • 3
Sep 17, 2019

They should not be paid. These kids are already in a substantially better place with regards to college/campus life as well as access to the university the non-athlete kids will never understand. They also have a forever network should they not pan out and go pro in their respective sport.

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

Should the coaches get paid millions? Why dont we just pay them in scholarships as well.....

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

Gruaduate assistant coaches are paid in scholarships

    • 1
Sep 19, 2019
Cardinal:

Should the coaches get paid millions? Why dont we just pay them in scholarships as well.....

The coaches are not getting free room and board, meals, classes, tutors, etc. all for free. Also, I will not guess the percentages but often these athletes end up in schools that academically they would never qualify for on their own merits. Oh yea, the university you attend won't help with your future prospects, right?

Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

Sep 17, 2019

I used to workout sometimes at the rec with one of the lineman at my university, a nationally recognized football powerhouse. Weights at 5am all the way to stretching/film at 8pm then sleep. Combine this grueling athletic schedule with class and think when he had any time to study or relax?

Sep 17, 2019

I'm as free market as it gets, but gotta go with Tebow.

The simple reality is, college football owes at leas 80% of its revenue to tradition. People aren't watching for the quality of the game. They're watching because they feel connected to the schools, either as alums or locals or whatever. We might laugh at the idea of "student athletes" but there is still just enough of a veneer of amateurism that a fan can go to the game today and still feel he's watching the same program his grandparents watched 60 years ago. That is critical to why the fans care at all.

If you turn it into the minor league of football so that it's primarily about the paycheck, then the connection with the school is severed almost completely. Sure you're using the school's facilities but the player won't even be a half-student like he is today. I say revenue drops 80% if that happens.

If you don't believe me, go spend time in a real college football town. See how much it permeates everyday life during the season. See how much more done-up the tailgates are compared to NFL tailgates. Notice how many more elderly fans you see. Consider how many people tailgating aren't even attending the game, they just want to be part of the action (way less common in NFL). Notice how many non-football fans are at the tailgate.

I would say a major college football game is more of a town fair than just a game. It unites a lot more than football fans. That passion for the school also contributes to non-sports support, like people donating for academic scholarships and local employers feeling all good inside that they hire a couple kids from the school every year.

And I think that could all go away if people instead feel like they're gathering around to watch a bunch of non-student minor-league football players that have zero connection to the school and are just wearing the colors for a paycheck.

I know, I know. Cue the cynics who will tell me that we've already reached that point. Your cynicism is noted. But listen to the customer. The leading customer (the guy who brings his RV to the tailgate and is a 3rd generation alum with season tickets for the last 20 years and who regularly attends booster lunches at $200 a pop) will tell you straight up, he lives and breathes college football but not minor league football

The relationship is complicated and apologies if I'm not describing it well, but I know the scene well enough to be comfortable estimating that revenue drops 80% if people start seeing the players as just playing for a paycheck. I'm in favor of something smaller, like just increasing the current scholarship to include a basic stipend that puts the athlete in a similar cash flow position to the upper-middle class kids on campus. But if we go too far it all blows up.

    • 8
    • 5
Sep 17, 2019

Agreed 10000%

What happens if we get Ezekiel Elliot and AB level tantrums thrown in college football for more pay / switching teams? The egos are all there, some are even good enough to command favoritism like that... College sports would die if it became a miniature version of the NFL.

Sep 17, 2019

Several high-profile players switched universities this year after playing-time tantrums and they're not even paid.

    • 1
Sep 19, 2019
FinancelsWacc:

Agreed 10000%

What happens if we get Ezekiel Elliot and AB level tantrums thrown in college football for more pay / switching teams? The egos are all there, some are even good enough to command favoritism like that... College sports would die if it became a miniature version of the NFL.

Lmao, why are you mad that a superstar forced a multi-billion dollar team to pay him instead of running him into the ground and moving on like that same team did with Demarco Murray? Temper tantrum? Jerry Jones was the one going on the radio and saying outlandish things about Zeke. People like you are why billionaire owners have the public perception advantage when it comes to labor negotiations.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

This ^

People don't watch college sports because of the "stars" and quality of play. They watch it for the teams and for the schools. If people watched it for the actual players and skill, the d-league, minor league baseball, and all of the shitty-offshoot football leagues would have much higher attendance.

    • 1
    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

Great point. Compare NCAA basketball revenue to d-league revenue. Of course not totally apples to apples but the staggering difference gives a hint about what could be potentially lost.

Sep 17, 2019

Keep in mind the often massive health and sacrifices student athletes make, particularly football players, which reward them nothing monetarily unless they turn professional (a small minority will do this). Universities and MSM bring in over $1b per year on the backs of these students that too often suffer career ending injuries which plague them the rest of their life. Meanwhile, they've sacrificed most of their weekly hours practicing/training which negatively affects their ability to compete for a high GPA and further negatively affects their post college career.

    • 2
Sep 17, 2019

We agree on another topic. SB for you.

Sep 17, 2019

They also get first-rate healthcare and access to surgeons other people don't. If regular Joe tears his ACL, he is up for the humongous bill and whoever he can access. The athletes at most of the schools go to the top guy in their area or nearby area. That's a huge difference.

Quality of life for CFB players is something ridiculous. You can't even understand until you've been around them day to day. I went to Oklahoma (OU) and those guys are living it up. Trust me on that.

Sep 17, 2019

Without commenting if I agree with this 100%, why the monkey shit? He backed up his view, you're that mad you disagree?

I'm not gonna do the "kids today" thing but y'all are wimps, save the shit for something else. Glad it's not an echo chamber in here

Sep 19, 2019

Tim Tebow is a privileged prick. You could also say a good amount of NFL revenue is due to the fact that ppl love the NFL yet they still have to pay more than half of revenue to players. The product on the field matters. You think Alabama was making alot of money when they were garbage compared to their revenues since Saban started recruiting stars? Sure, a Bama fan isn't there specifically for Josh Jacobs or Derrick Henry. But Josh Jacobs making that program good attracts a ton of fanfare which turns into $$$. Even the tradition you're speaking on is built off the backs of superstar players making a program a national brand. What's worse is that these guys can't even do basic endorsements. Also, lmao at if players get paid then the school connection is gone and revenue drops. All ppl give a shit about is getting good players so their school is good. As long as that happens people will watch. Your take is ridiculous.

    • 2
Sep 19, 2019

So you think college football would do just as well if players got paid half of revenue?

Well I'll tell you what. The players would really enjoy that too. How about you start a minor league for the NFL where players get paid substantially. All the good players would join your league, who the hell would play for Alabama for free when they could make bank in your league? Saban would follow them too. You'd put major college football right out of business.

Because you know, minor league baseball and the NBA D-league absolutely crush it.

Sep 17, 2019

Are we all under the assumption that the big time athlete don't already get paid? That being said, why wouldn't we allow them to make money off sponsorship or anything else that involves their likeness at the very least? This would give them the ability make some money, accept meals, gifts, etc. and not interfere with the "amateur" nature of the sport.

Sep 17, 2019

Nick Saban can get paid 6 mil but if a college athlete decides to make a Youtube channel the NCAA blocks him from monetizing his brand.

But at the same school a kid can use the skills he learned at that school and create the next app, business, etc.

Sep 17, 2019

Its a good point but amateurism is part of the product. If you pay the players and the fans don't like the feel of that, it all goes away. Not just Saban's money but also a lot of the scholarship money.

All arguments in favor of paying players begin with the premise the college sports is big business. We should ask why it is such a big business and come up with solutions that don't change that premise.

I kind of like the idea of allowing players to participate in royalties off the use of their likeness in NCAA products (video games etc) because then the player isn't choosing his school based on who offered the most.

Sep 17, 2019

Just don't block them. Or give them a small stipend similar to what you give PhD students. Or treat it as a work study.

No one is saying (at least I'm not) giving them 100k a year for just going to school.

Sep 17, 2019
PteroGonzalez:

amateurism is part of the product

I don't think any college sports fan would say that, especially all those screaming in agony when "their" team loses (I am not one of them but they are inescapable in the media this time of year)

Sep 17, 2019

Texas A&M backed up the Brinks truck to Jimbo Fisher's house but if a college athlete is homeless and needs somewhere to live he can't accept shelter (a garage apartment) from alumni.

Sep 17, 2019

It is shocking to me that some WSO participants who are usually all about free markets and capitalism, would support an anti-capitalist viewpoint. The administration at the schools are making hundreds of millions of dollars by taking advantage of their students. No one is asking the schools to pay students extra money beyond scholarships. However, the students should have the right to take advantage of a capitalist system by using their brand to make money.

    • 5
Sep 17, 2019

Ex-fucking-actly

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

You can have a capitalist view / belief system but still temper that based on the inherent consequences and risks you think would come with a shift to a completely capitalistic system...

You can't have true, completely free capitalism when institutions (Bama, Ohio State, Michigan, etc.) have complete control and purview on admittance into their athletic and academic programs...

Sep 17, 2019

I'm not saying I oppose payments - and I don't like the fact you can't even buy meals when SEC schools are pumping out "hostesses" for recruits - but the argument against payment isn't anti-capitalist. That's not why people oppose paying athletes. I will grant you that their protests are hypocritical based on a lot of the stuff that goes on.

Sep 20, 2019

I think someone truly understands capitalism and free markets when they understand its limitations. People who thoughtlessly parrot free market principles 100% of the time are usually folks who paid attention in freshman Intro Micro and then discovered weed soon afterward.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

I was under the impression that this was an open secret, but I've heard that college athletes actually DO get paid, though not nearly as much as they're worth.

Anecdote: someone I trust played a non-popular sport at a D1-but-not-athletic-powerhouse school, and she told me that when the women's basketball team got new shoes they'd also get an extra shoebox full of cash. She made it seem like this was an incentive for them to stay on the team and keep playing rather than a "salary".

With guys like Trevor Lawrence, I could see it going a couple ways. He's making massive amounts of money for Clemson, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's being shown some "appreciation" by the athletic program. On the other hand, he's Trevor Lawrence, he's a national sports celebrity, he's getting great treatment by one of the most visible football teams in the country, and they're setting him up for a first round draft pic in a couple of years. He probably wouldn't feel like he was getting stiffed by not getting a cash shoebox.

I agree that NCAA sports with all the revenue that they generate are a mega scam, but I'm not sure the story of the "starving student-athlete" is all that common.

    • 2
    • 3
Sep 17, 2019

This is so incorrect it blows my mind.
For context: I just finished playing a "revenue-generating" sport for 4 years at a top 10 nationally ranked program.

I can assure you that if players on my team were not receiving boxes of cash, your girlfriend on a non-competitive D1 women's basketball team was not either.

Do some still receive illegal benefits? For sure. But in no way is that the norm. You do realize the consequences that programs and individuals associated with that face right? The risk of a top program taking that route isn't worth the incremental benefit they'll get from the value that recruit adds to the team relative to the value added by the pipeline of other 4 or 5 star recruits begging for a chance to play.

If the school sells my jersey in the school store, I want a % of the proceeds. If they put my face and name on their billboards, commercials, and Instagram ads, I want to be compensated. If I sell my autograph or someone pays for my lunch, I don't want to be banned from competition for 2 years. That's all we ask.

Sep 20, 2019

Does your school sell your jersey or use your face for commercials? I feel like part of the issue here is that there's like 3-5 people at the whole school who can claim that, and they're all multi-millionaire pro athletes right after school so they're not gonna care to make noise about it.

It takes a rare blend of college superstar + post-college struggle to raise an issue, which is why Ed O'Bannon and Maurice Clarett are the ones who became plaintiffs on the issue.

Sep 17, 2019

Lol this may be the WOAT comment on WSO.

Sep 17, 2019

At minimum they need to be allowed some kind of profit share stipend. I was friends with a football player at the powerhouse football program school I went to and he talked about the massive time commitment required to participate in the program which made part-time work virtually impossible.

Sep 17, 2019

I'm fine with using the likeness of players to be paid so that they will finally release a new NCAA game. However, although it doesn't apply to all players, scholarships and football lifestyle is enough compensation. They get free meals, get to stay in shape as a job and are also football players on a college campus which has many perks in the social scene. I don't mind paying them x amount a week or hourly for their service because they bring a ton of revenue. To Tebow's point though, they know they are signing up to play for a shot at something much bigger in the future and should just be happy to make it to the college level as an athlete. Get the free degree and you can make money elsewhere if football fails.

    • 1
    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

They are STUDENT athletes for a reason. Unpopular opinion but maybe we should stop idolizing and profiting off of poor students who risk their future health and economic stability in order to get a bad scholarship to a "ok" school and never make it Pro. LEARN at college and sure play sports but lets not idolize and monetize the indisputable ownership and manipulation of these students, who should be focusing primarily on their studies...

Sep 17, 2019

I don't think the conversation is about paying college athletes, because I agree with a lot of points made about how the paychecks will more likely than not ruin a big part of the appeal/sport/ etc.. No one has to pay the kids anything, but I don't see how the NCAA rationalizes the college kids not making money for themselves using their brand/image. How does being a college athlete restrict your ability to make money for yourself?

If I am the star WR for the Oregon Ducks (noted for relationship with Nike), and they want to use me specifically for a shoe / glove/ apparel marketing campaign, I should 100% receive the benefits from that. That's between Nike and myself, screw the NCAA.

Lastly, the monthly stipend / allowance idea is garbage.

    • 2
Sep 17, 2019

The obvious answer is not to pay college students, but to remove the profit-making aspect from the institutions. Any $$ made by an NCAA member in merchandising or ticket sales or anything like that gets poured back into scholarships at the individual institution. Coaches cannot be paid more than the median salary of the professors who are actually teaching.

The reason this is an issue is because the big basketball and football factories are making a ton of money on unpaid student athletes and pouring it into massive salaries for coaches, multimillion dollar stadiums, and other shit that does nothing to benefit the core mission of an educational institution but that is just plowing capital back into the program to make even more money. That's great for a business, but not a great look for a tax exempt educational institution.

    • 3
Sep 17, 2019

The reason this is an issue is because the big basketball and football factories are making a ton of money on unpaid student athletes and pouring it into massive salaries for coaches, multimillion dollar stadiums, and other shit that does nothing to benefit the core mission of an educational institution but that is just plowing capital back into the program to make even more money. That's great for a business, but not a great look for a tax exempt educational institution.

Bro. Here we go again.

  1. Football and Men's Basketball pay for the entirety of a college's other sports. You dont' want to go changing how the money flows for those or you risk losing the fanbase. 100% I, and many other fans, would not give a shit about the football team if they moved to a minor league rather than being the "school" team. I could give a shit about the other minor league sports in my area and the attendance confirms this for all sports.
  2. Athletes, as a part of their scholarship, are getting a living stipend to pay rent. That's upwards of 2k at my school where rent is usually like $500-$750.
  3. There are different colors of money. These different colors of money go into different things. The coach is not getting paid from the same bucket as academic scholarships. Building dollars are mostly donations, not revenue from the sports (mostly).

These are very basic things my man. Before you make these arguments, you need to learn how and where the money flows.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

Holy shit you're actually insane. I love it. +1 SB, seriously.

Sep 17, 2019

I am always baffled that so many "free-market conservatives" side with the NCAA and billionaire owners regarding what athletes are paid. Pay "amateur", minor league, and major league athletes market rates. Full stop.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

I think the conservatives are split on this one. Perhaps there is a subliminal religious thing going on here.

Sep 18, 2019

It is pretty crazy watching people who want the estate tax abolished because its "unfair" arguing against paying the guys making millions for the universities.

Sep 18, 2019

Agreed. The intellectual inconsistency here is astounding. If you create value for an organization, you get paid for it. The same people arguing the opposite point SURELY want to get paid for the value they create at their firms. Maybe we should switch I-banking compensation to living stipends and food stamps because, you know, why does anyone need to make money?

I don't think paying the kids a salary is the way forward, but an incentive pay for, say, winning the SEC Championship? Sure--that would be great. The kids are still playing for the school, taking the risks that come with it for a shot at something better down the road, but they're also incentivized and compensated in line with their contributions to the school. You don't win? You don't get paid. It seems like a logical solution that preserves the integrity of the game while providing some compensation for the kids.

    • 1
Sep 17, 2019

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3uukje
Cartman cracked this case years ago

Sep 17, 2019

If we're going to recognize college sports as the commercial enterprise that it is then make these so-called non-profit schools pay income taxes.

"Work ethic, work ethic" - Vince Vaughn
Sep 17, 2019

Tebow is incorrect af. In principle, they should be paid. In practicality, Title IX queers the deal because paying the women''s volleyball team isn't economically viable.

There should be a revenue share on merch sales, etc. rather than a fixed stipend.

I come from down in the Valley, where Mr. when you're young, they bring you up to do like your daddy done.

Sep 17, 2019

Like a lot of the above, I agree that these stars should get paid for their "brand" or persona. Athletes should be compensated for things like jersey sales, likeness in media and video games, etc. In my eyes, this mitigates the chance that a big college star who generates loads of money for his school and the NCAA will get injured and not play past a rookie contract. In addition, this actually gives that same athlete the choice of actually wanting to play sports professionally if he doesn't want to - though if they're that big a household name, chances are they will.

Additionally, we may actually get good college sports games again where we don't have to always play as #44 or "Power Forward" anymore. My problem with the NCAA is they have so many revenue streams - Clearinghouse, sponsors, media deals, licenses, etc. and that their advertisements on TV always seem to pretend like they are giving these guys a chance at stardom (the big names don't need the NCAA - hate watching March Madness commercials).

I can't give a full answer on what the breakdown of percentage on payments and proceeds should be in this scenario, but college star power drives interest, coverage, and therefore revenue for programs and the NCAA. Duke vs. UNC would have been crazy last year regardless, but billing it as Coby White, Cam Johnson, Luke Maye, and Nassir Little vs. Reddish, Barrett, and Zion made it so much bigger. Nike stock dropped when Zion blew out his shoe. The fact of the matter is these athletes are treated like property of the NCAA, but their influence is so much greater than that and should be reflected as such (essentially NBA-lite with the level of commercialization these days).

Last thing, not all stars are great players. The NCAA touted UCF vs. Duke as Zion vs. Tacko. As an undrafted player, Tacko may not even see any share of money, but the fact of the matter is, his brand brought in interest, media coverage, and probably a few knock-off t-shirts that will not pay him any profits.

Sep 18, 2019

The making money for the school thing is a compete myth. NCAA isn't capitalism its communism.

Sep 18, 2019

At the root of the problem which holds back reform, I think they already have benefits compared to average students, which don't receive as much attention. Why pay them additional money on top of it, when 95% of the rest of the university is graduating with 200k debt. Give them a percentage share of merchandise sales. However, take away the added benefits outside of scholarship that they already receive (free house cleaning, academic favoritism, free tutoring outside of TA). The truly profitable ones (Lawrence, Tua, etc.) will be able to afford to pay for these benefits, as well as receiving extra compensation.

Sep 19, 2019

The argument that people watch college sports due to school affiliation rather than quality of product and that paying athletes would disrupt that imbalance is so utterly ludicrous.

I honestly can't believe so many users, especially the ones who seem to have a reasonable and logical view of the world in other topics/issues, are pushing this point. You're basically saying that kids should not be able to profit off of their own work and image because that could potentially affect your enjoyment of the game in the medium/long run. How is that not crazy, seriously?

I mean, someone sells a jersey with my number on (and they're 100% selling it because of the work I put in), I ought to be compensated for that. It's so fair and logical that I can't understand how this is even a debate. Even if you argue that it would eventually lead to drop is viewers/interest in those sports, thus leading to less overall revenue and profits, for the athletes generating the money, a piece of something smaller is still (much) better than no piece of something bigger - and again, it shouldn't be your fear of having players less emotionally invested with your alma mater dictating whether or not someone should be entitled to make money off of their work. Get over yourselves, ffs

    • 6
Sep 19, 2019

The argument that paying players would cause people to stop watching their college is absurd and has no basis in logic.

Sep 19, 2019

I view college sports to the equivalent of an unpaid internship that you can leverage and turn into a career post-college paying 6 figures. In the college sports case (read basketball/football), you could in theory turn that into a high 6 figures/7 figures if you were to go pro at some level. Or, for others, leverage your NCAA experience with good grades/degree into a 6 figures white collar job. I don't see how there would be a need to compensate the players more than just scholorships/housing/food for the short time they are at a university.

    • 3
Sep 20, 2019

I see the comparison between unpaid internships and college sports, but they're not entirely similar. When people do unpaid internships, they choose to work unpaid and have the ability to accept offers that actually pay money which can benefit their success down the road just as much. In the NCAA however, you do not have the option to accept working for pay elsewhere without forgoing opportunity cost. For the NBA, the vast majority of young recruits are taken from the NCAA, and those that choose a different path simply fall behind. In football it's even worse because it is a solely American sport, meaning no overseas leagues exist and the only viable path in is through the NCAA. Now compare this to full time recruitment for finance jobs; plenty of people make it in to finance while getting paying jobs that boost their long-term prospects, and they can also profit from their own brand through things like tutoring, streaming, YouTube, etc.
To put into perspective what the NCAA structure would like for internships, imagine if the Bureau of Labor forbid pay for any internship that took place while a student was enrolled in an undergraduate institution. You want to be paid for a WM or PE internship, too bad, then you cannot finish your undergrad degree and be eligible for FT undergraduate recruitment. Don't like it, then you'll have to find work in another country and go to school there. The problem with the NCAA structure is that it exists as a monopoly that forbids pay, the exact opposite of a normal capitalist structure. In the labor market we're used to, our work can generate our own wealth, an not being compensated often bears legal ramifications for the firm. In the NCAA, athletes' efforts cannot be used to generate their own wealth, and profiting from their own work and likeness bears legal ramifications for the individual.
One final point, the value that top tier athletes generate for their institutions astronomically outweighs the value (if any value at all) that unpaid interns give to their firms. No intern that generates millions for a company is going unpaid.

I'm a fun guy. Obviously I love the game of basketball. I mean there's more questions you have to ask me in order for me to tell you about myself

    • 1
    • 1
Sep 19, 2019
Comment

"It's okay, I'll see you on the other side"