28 Nov Reasons Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid Scholarly Articles
Colleges and universities provide an invaluable and vital service to our communities: education. A now-famous bumper sticker once said, “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” To meet this slogan, as reported by Cheesman-Day and Newberger (7), the U.S. Census Bureau expressed it best when it stated that lifetime income is higher for those with a college degree over $1 million than for non-graduates. Despite these statistics, trials and columns continue to pour in from those who advocate paying student-athletes, while refusing to recognize or accept the value of a college education. Is higher education invaluable or not? Based on a workload of 1,000 hours per year and an average scholarship value, economist Richard Sheehan, 16, calculated the base hourly wage of a college basketball player at $6.82 and that of a football player at $7.69. Coaches` hourly wages, on the other hand, ranged from $250 to $647 per hour (depending on salary). Again, in Eitzen`s metaphor, masters accumulate wealth at the expense of the slave, even though the health of the athlete/slave is threatened by participation (12). When the scholarship is signed, the athlete and his/her family have reasonable expectations that include the efforts of the coaching staff and university administration to fulfill all obligations under the contract. Moreover, my colleague notes that “failure to respect the basic premise of such a contract would result in the collapse of all forms of business, large or small.” If the NCAA and higher education athletic departments are one company, why are they allowed to act like a cartel? And finally, do student-athletes really know the “agreement” when they wrote their name on National Signing Day? It seems not.
Tim Tebow told The Daily Show (26) that before a national championship game, he joked with his college coach about getting some of his bonus money to get a win. This brings to the surface another way of sharing revenue: coaches share bonuses and other performance incentives with players. Most coaches in the big programs receive huge bonuses based on team record and ranking, all of which are due to player performance. For example, according to the 2009 IRS income tax returns, Mike Krzyewski received $2,222,543 in bonuses and incentives (4). According to this proposal, coaches would have to share 25 to 50% of their bonuses with players. Isn`t it reasonable to expect athletes to receive some of the bonus money? After all, they (i.e. the players) are the ones who allow coaches to earn these bonuses. The irony in this conflict is that student-athletes cost the university a considerable amount of money each year. For example, a full scholarship over four years can range from $30,000 to $200,000, depending on whether the institution is public or private (29). But let`s address this main point directly: there is a clear lack of appreciation of a university degree on the part of those who are in favor of paying athletes, and until genuine gratitude for this concept develops, this argument is likely to persist. In the 1984 decision of the NCAA Board of Regents, the Supreme Court ruled that “artificial restrictions” on the number of televised football games broadcast by the NCAA reduced competition and violated antitrust laws.
At the same time, however, the court pointed out that some of the NCAA`s other restrictions on athletes — including wage bans — are essential to preserve the “product” of college football: While the NCAA appears to operate in a purely capitalist/professional atmosphere, it continues to support an amateur concept in college athletics. These competing and often conflicting values are leading some college athletes in major soccer and basketball programs to question the status quo of the current system through their words and actions. For example, many athletes are still trying to get their “piece of the pie,” albeit under the table. And so that brings us to our counterpoint. Reason No. 3: Student athletes are set up to succeed after college, with the potential to earn a lot of money. The biggest losers will be the myriad of scholars – young men and women – who compete in non-profit sports like swimming, wrestling, gymnastics, volleyball and track and field, to name a few. These athletes cannot reasonably expect significant salaries. Thus, in many cases, student-athletes cannot take advantage of the many extras that a university education offers. Why do athletes accept watered-down academic experience or the corruption of manipulated transcripts, phantom classes, substitute candidates and paper writing tutors? It may be because they are disenfranchised under the current system and lose scholarships, starting roles and eligibility criteria if they complain.