essay about paying college athletes

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, should college athletes be paid an expert debate analysis.

Extracurriculars

The argumentative essay is one of the most frequently assigned types of essays in both high school and college writing-based courses. Instructors often ask students to write argumentative essays over topics that have “real-world relevance.” The question, “Should college athletes be paid?” is one of these real-world relevant topics that can make a great essay subject! 

In this article, we’ll give you all the tools you need to write a solid essay arguing why college athletes should be paid and why college athletes should not be paid. We'll provide:

• An explanation of the NCAA and what role it plays in the lives of student athletes
• A summary of the pro side of the argument that's in favor of college athletes being paid
• A summary of the con side of the argument that believes college athletes shouldn't be paid
• Five tips that will help you write an argumentative essay that answers the question "Should college athletes be paid?" 

The NCAA is the organization that oversees and regulates collegiate athletics. 

What Is the NCAA? 

In order to understand the context surrounding the question, “Should student athletes be paid?”, you have to understand what the NCAA is and how it relates to student-athletes. 

NCAA stands for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (but people usually just call it the “N-C-double-A”). The NCAA is a nonprofit organization that serves as the national governing body for collegiate athletics. 

The NCAA specifically regulates collegiate student athletes at the organization’s 1,098 “member schools.” Student-athletes at these member schools are required to follow the rules set by the NCAA for their academic performance and progress while in college and playing sports. Additionally, the NCAA sets the rules for each of their recognized sports to ensure everyone is playing by the same rules. ( They also change these rules occasionally, which can be pretty controversial! ) 

The NCAA website states that the organization is “dedicated to the well-being and lifelong success of college athletes” and prioritizes their well-being in academics, on the field, and in life beyond college sports. That means the NCAA sets some pretty strict guidelines about what their athletes can and can't do. And of course, right now, college athletes can't be paid for playing their sport. 

As it stands, NCAA athletes are allowed to receive scholarships that cover their college tuition and related school expenses. But historically, they haven't been allowed to receive additional compensation. That meant athletes couldn't receive direct payment for their participation in sports in any form, including endorsement deals, product sponsorships, or gifts.  

Athletes who violated the NCAA’s rules about compensation could be suspended from participating in college sports or kicked out of their athletic program altogether. 

The Problem: Should College Athletes Be Paid? 

You know now that one of the most well-known functions of the NCAA is regulating and limiting the compensation that student-athletes are able to receive. While many people might not question this policy, the question of why college athletes should be paid or shouldn't be paid has actually been a hot-button topic for several years.

The fact that people keep asking the question, “Should student athletes be paid?” indicates that there’s some heat out there surrounding this topic. The issue is frequently debated on sports talk shows , in the news media , and on social media . Most recently, the topic re-emerged in public discourse in the U.S. because of legislation that was passed by the state of California in 2019.

In September 2019, California governor Gavin Newsom signed a law that allowed college athletes in California to strike endorsement deals. An endorsement deal allows athletes to be paid for endorsing a product, like wearing a specific brand of shoes or appearing in an advertisement for a product.

In other words, endorsement deals allow athletes to receive compensation from companies and organizations because of their athletic talent. That means Governor Newsom’s bill explicitly contradicts the NCAA’s rules and regulations for financial compensation for student-athletes at member schools.

But why would Governor Newsom go against the NCAA? Here’s why: the California governor believes that it's unethical for the NCAA to make money based on the unpaid labor of its athletes . And the NCAA definitely makes money: each year, the NCAA upwards of a billion dollars in revenue as a result of its student-athlete talent, but the organization bans those same athletes from earning any money for their talent themselves. With the new California law, athletes would be able to book sponsorships and use agents to earn money, if they choose to do so. 

The NCAA’s initial response to California’s new law was to push back hard. But after more states introduced similar legislation , the NCAA changed its tune. In October 2019, the NCAA pledged to pass new regulations when the board voted unanimously to allow student athletes to receive compensation for use of their name, image, and likeness. 

Simply put: student athletes can now get paid through endorsement deals. 

In the midst of new state legislation and the NCAA’s response, the ongoing debate about paying college athletes has returned to the spotlight. Everyone from politicians, to sports analysts, to college students are arguing about it. There are strong opinions on both sides of the issue, so we’ll look at how some of those opinions can serve as key points in an argumentative essay.

Let's take a look at the arguments in favor of paying student athletes!

The Pros: Why College Athletes Should B e Paid

Since the argument about whether college athletes should be paid has gotten a lot of public attention, there are some lines of reasoning that are frequently called upon to support the claim that college athletes should be paid. 

In this section, we'll look at the three biggest arguments in favor of why college athletes should be paid. We'll also give you some ideas on how you can support these arguments in an argumentative essay.

Argument 1: The Talent Should Receive Some of the Profits

This argument on why college athletes should be paid is probably the one people cite the most. It’s also the easiest one to support with facts and evidence. 

Essentially, this argument states that the NCAA makes millions of dollars because people pay to watch college athletes compete, and it isn’t fair that the athletes don't get a share of the profits

Without the student athletes, the NCAA wouldn’t earn over a billion dollars in annual revenue , and college and university athletic programs wouldn’t receive hundreds of thousands of dollars from the NCAA each year. In fact, without student athletes, the NCAA wouldn’t exist at all. 

Because student athletes are the ones who generate all this revenue, people in favor of paying college athletes argue they deserve to receive some of it back. Otherwise, t he NCAA and other organizations (like media companies, colleges, and universities) are exploiting a bunch of talented young people for their own financial gain.

To support this argument in favor of paying college athletes, you should include specific data and revenue numbers that show how much money the NCAA makes (and what portion of that actually goes to student athletes). For example, they might point out the fact that the schools that make the most money in college sports only spend around 10% of their tens of millions in athletics revenue on scholarships for student-athletes. Analyzing the spending practices of the NCAA and its member institutions could serve as strong evidence to support this argument in a “why college athletes should be paid” essay. 

I've you've ever been a college athlete, then you know how hard you have to train in order to compete. It can feel like a part-time job...which is why some people believe athletes should be paid for their work!

Argument 2: College Athletes Don’t Have Time to Work Other Jobs

People sometimes casually refer to being a student-athlete as a “full-time job.” For many student athletes, this is literally true. The demands on a student-athlete’s time are intense. Their days are often scheduled down to the minute, from early in the morning until late at night. 

One thing there typically isn’t time for in a student-athlete’s schedule? Working an actual job. 

Sports programs can imply that student-athletes should treat their sport like a full-time job as well. This can be problematic for many student-athletes, who may not have any financial resources to cover their education. (Not all NCAA athletes receive full, or even partial, scholarships!) While it may not be expressly forbidden for student-athletes to get a part-time job, the pressure to go all-in for your team while still maintaining your eligibility can be tremendous. 

In addition to being a financial burden, the inability to work a real job as a student-athlete can have consequences for their professional future. Other college students get internships or other career-specific experience during college—opportunities that student-athletes rarely have time for. When they graduate, proponents of this stance argue, student-athletes are under-experienced and may face challenges with starting a career outside of the sports world.

Because of these factors, some argue that if people are going to refer to being a student-athlete as a “full-time job,” then student-athletes should be paid for doing that job.  

To support an argument of this nature, you can offer real-life examples of a student-athlete’s daily or weekly schedule to show that student-athletes have to treat their sport as a full-time job. For instance, this Twitter thread includes a range of responses from real student-athletes to an NCAA video portraying a rose-colored interpretation of a day in the life of a student-athlete. 

Presenting the Twitter thread as one form of evidence in an essay would provide effective support for the claim that college athletes should be paid as if their sport is a “full-time job.” You might also take this stance in order to claim that if student-athletes aren’t getting paid, we must adjust our demands on their time and behavior.

Argument 3: Only Some Student Athletes Should Be Paid

This take on the question, “Should student athletes be paid?” sits in the middle ground between the more extreme stances on the issue. There are those who argue that only the student athletes who are big money-makers for their university and the NCAA should be paid.  

The reasoning behind this argument? That’s just how capitalism works. There are always going to be student-athletes who are more talented and who have more media-magnetizing personalities. They’re the ones who are going to be the face of athletic programs, who lead their teams to playoffs and conference victories, and who are approached for endorsement opportunities. 

Additionally, some sports don't make money for their schools. Many of these sports fall under Title IX, which states that no one can be excluded from participation in a federally-funded program (including sports) because of their gender or sex. Unfortunately, many of these programs aren't popular with the public , which means they don't make the same revenue as high-dollar sports like football or basketball . 

In this line of thinking, since there isn’t realistically enough revenue to pay every single college athlete in every single sport, the ones who generate the most revenue are the only ones who should get a piece of the pie. 

To prove this point, you can look at revenue numbers as well. For instance, the womens' basketball team at the University of Louisville lost $3.8 million dollars in revenue during the 2017-2018 season. In fact, the team generated less money than they pay for their coaching staff. In instances like these, you might argue that it makes less sense to pay athletes than it might in other situations (like for University of Alabama football, which rakes in over $110 million dollars a year .) 

There are many people who think it's a bad idea to pay college athletes, too. Let's take a look at the opposing arguments. 

The Cons: Why College Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid

People also have some pretty strong opinions about why college athletes shouldn't be paid. These arguments can make for a pretty compelling essay, too! 

In this section, we'll look at the three biggest arguments against paying college athletes. We'll also talk about how you can support each of these claims in an essay. 

Argument 1: College Athletes Already Get Paid

On this side of the fence, the most common reason given for why college athletes should not be paid is that they already get paid: they receive free tuition and, in some cases, additional funding to cover their room, board, and miscellaneous educational expenses. 

Proponents of this argument state that free tuition and covered educational expenses is compensation enough for student-athletes. While this money may not go straight into a college athlete's pocket, it's still a valuable resource . Considering most students graduate with nearly $30,000 in student loan debt , an athletic scholarship can have a huge impact when it comes to making college affordable . 

Evidence for this argument might look at the financial support that student-athletes receive for their education, and compare those numbers to the financial support that non-athlete students receive for their schooling. You can also cite data that shows the real value of a college tuition at certain schools. For example, student athletes on scholarship at Duke may be "earning" over $200,000 over the course of their collegiate careers. 

This argument works to highlight the ways in which student-athletes are compensated in financial and in non-financial ways during college , essentially arguing that the special treatment they often receive during college combined with their tuition-free ride is all the compensation they have earned.

Some people who are against paying athletes believe that compensating athletes will lead to amateur athletes being treated like professionals. Many believe this is unfair and will lead to more exploitation, not less. 

Argument 2: Paying College Athletes Would Side-Step the Real Problem

Another argument against paying student athletes is that college sports are not professional sports , and treating student athletes like professionals exploits them and takes away the spirit of amateurism from college sports . 

This stance may sound idealistic, but those who take this line of reasoning typically do so with the goal of protecting both student-athletes and the tradition of “amateurism” in college sports. This argument is built on the idea that the current system of college sports is problematic and needs to change, but that paying student-athletes is not the right solution. 

Instead, this argument would claim that there is an even better way to fix the corrupt system of NCAA sports than just giving student-athletes a paycheck. To support such an argument, you might turn to the same evidence that’s cited in this NPR interview : the European model of supporting a true minor league system for most sports is effective, so the U.S. should implement a similar model. 

In short: creating a minor league can ensure athletes who want a career in their sport get paid, while not putting the burden of paying all collegiate athletes on a university. 

Creating and supporting a true professional minor league would allow the students who want to make money playing sports to do so. Universities could then confidently put earned revenue from sports back into the university, and student-athletes wouldn’t view their college sports as the best and only path to a career as a professional athlete. Those interested in playing professionally would be able to pursue this dream through the minor leagues instead, and student athletes could just be student athletes. 

The goal of this argument is to sort of achieve a “best of both worlds” solution: with the development and support of a true minor league system, student-athletes would be able to focus on the foremost goal of getting an education, and those who want to get paid for their sport can do so through the minor league. Through this model, student-athletes’ pursuit of their education is protected, and college sports aren’t bogged down in ethical issues and logistical hang-ups. 

Argument 3: It Would Be a Logistical Nightmare

This argument against paying student athletes takes a stance on the basis of logistics. Essentially, this argument states that while the current system is flawed, paying student athletes is just going to make the system worse. So until someone can prove that paying collegiate athletes will fix the system, it's better to maintain the status quo. 

Formulating an argument around this perspective basically involves presenting the different proposals for how to go about paying college athletes, then poking holes in each proposed approach. Such an argument would probably culminate in stating that the challenges to implementing pay for college athletes are reason enough to abandon the idea altogether. 

Here's what we mean. One popular proposed approach to paying college athletes is the notion of “pay-for-play.” In this scenario, all college athletes would receive the same weekly stipend to play their sport . 

In this type of argument, you might explain the pay-for-play solution, then pose some questions toward the approach that expose its weaknesses, such as: Where would the money to pay athletes come from? How could you pay athletes who play certain sports, but not others? How would you avoid Title IX violations? Because there are no easy answers to these questions, you could argue that paying college athletes would just create more problems for the world of college sports to deal with.

Posing these difficult questions may persuade a reader that attempting to pay college athletes would cause too many issues and lead them to agree with the stance that college athletes should not be paid. 

5 Tips for Writing About Paying College Athletes

If you’re assigned the prompt “Should college athletes be paid," don't panic. There are several steps you can take to write an amazing argumentative essay about the topic! We've broken our advice into five helpful tips that you can use to persuade your readers (and ace your assignment).

Tip 1: Plan Out a Logical Structure for Your Essay

In order to write a logical, well-organized argumentative essay, one of the first things you need to do is plan out a structure for your argument. Using a bare-bones argumentative outline for a “why college athletes should be paid” essay is a good place to start. 

Check out our example of an argumentative essay outline for this topic below: 

• The thesis statement must communicate the topic of the essay: Whether college athletes should be paid, and 
• Convey a position on that topic: That college athletes should/ should not be paid, and 
• State a couple of defendable, supportable reasons why college athletes should be paid (or vice versa).
• Support Point #1 with evidence
• Explain/interpret the evidence with your own, original commentary 
• Support Point #2 with evidence
• Explain/interpret the evidence with your own, original commentary
• Support Point #3 with evidence
• New body paragraph addressing opposing viewpoints
• Concluding paragraph

This outline does a few things right. First, it makes sure you have a strong thesis statement. Second, it helps you break your argument down into main points (that support your thesis, of course). Lastly, it reminds you that you need to both include evidence and explain your evidence for each of your argumentative points. 

While you can go off-book once you start drafting if you feel like you need to, having an outline to start with can help you visualize how many argumentative points you have, how much evidence you need, and where you should insert your own commentary throughout your essay. 

Remember: the best argumentative essays are organized ones! 

Tip 2: Create a Strong Thesis 

T he most important part of the introduction to an argumentative essay claiming that college athletes should/should not be paid is the thesis statement. You can think of a thesis like a backbone: your thesis ties all of your essay parts together so your paper can stand on its own two feet! 

So what does a good thesis look like? A solid thesis statement in this type of argumentative essay will convey your stance on the topic (“Should college athletes be paid?”) and present one or more supportable reasons why you’re making this argument. 

With these goals in mind, here’s an example of a thesis statement that includes clear reasons that support the stance that college athletes should be paid: 

Because the names, image, and talents of college athletes are used for massive financial gain, college athletes should be able to benefit from their athletic career in the same way that their universities do by getting endorsements. 

Here's a thesis statement that takes the opposite stance--that college athletes shouldn’t be paid --and includes a reason supporting that stance: 

In order to keep college athletics from becoming over-professionalized, compensation for college athletes should be restricted to covering college tuition and related educational expenses.

Both of these sample thesis statements make it clear that your essay is going to be dedicated to making an argument: either that college athletes should be paid, or that college athletes shouldn’t be paid. They both convey some reasons why you’re making this argument that can also be supported with evidence. 

Your thesis statement gives your argumentative essay direction . Instead of ranting about why college athletes should/shouldn’t be paid in the remainder of your essay, you’ll find sources that help you explain the specific claim you made in your thesis statement. And a well-organized, adequately supported argument is the kind that readers will find persuasive!

Tip 3: Find Credible Sources That Support Your Thesis

In an argumentative essay, your commentary on the issue you’re arguing about is obviously going to be the most fun part to write. But great essays will cite outside sources and other facts to help substantiate their argumentative points. That's going to involve—you guessed it!—research. 

For this particular topic, the issue of whether student athletes should be paid has been widely discussed in the news media (think The New York Times , NPR , or ESPN ). 

For example, this data reported by the NCAA shows a breakdown of the gender and racial demographics of member-school administration, coaching staff, and student athletes. These are hard numbers that you could interpret and pair with the well-reasoned arguments of news media writers to support a particular point you’re making in your argument. 

Though this may seem like a topic that wouldn’t generate much scholarly research, it’s worth a shot to check your library database for peer-reviewed studies of student athletes’ experiences in college to see if anything related to paying student athletes pops up. Scholarly research is the holy grail of evidence, so try to find relevant articles if you can. 

Ultimately, if you can incorporate a mix of mainstream sources, quantitative or statistical evidence, and scholarly, peer-reviewed sources, you’ll be on-track to building an excellent argument in response to the question, “Should student athletes be paid?”

Having multiple argumentative points in your essay helps you support your thesis.

Tip 4: Develop and Support Multiple Points

We’ve reviewed how to write an intro and thesis statement addressing the issue of paying college athletes, so let’s talk next about the meat and potatoes of your argumentative essay: the body paragraphs. 

The body paragraphs that are sandwiched between your intro paragraph and concluding paragraph are where you build and explain your argument. Generally speaking, each body paragraph should do the following: 

• Start with a topic sentence that presents a point that supports your stance and that can be debated, 
• Present summaries, paraphrases, or quotes from credible sources--evidence, in other words--that supports the point stated in the topic sentence, and
• Explain and interpret the evidence presented with your own, original commentary. 

In an argumentative essay on why college athletes should be paid, for example, a body paragraph might look like this: 

Thesis Statement : College athletes should not be paid because it would be a logistical nightmare for colleges and universities and ultimately cause negative consequences for college sports. 

Body Paragraph #1: While the notion of paying college athletes is nice in theory, a major consequence of doing so would be the financial burden this decision would place on individual college sports programs. A recent study cited by the NCAA showed that only about 20 college athletic programs consistently operate in the black at the present time. If the NCAA allows student-athletes at all colleges and universities to be paid, the majority of athletic programs would not even have the funds to afford salaries for their players anyway. This would mean that the select few athletic programs that can afford to pay their athletes’ salaries would easily recruit the most talented players and, thus, have the tools to put together teams that destroy their competition. Though individual athletes would benefit from the NCAA allowing compensation for student-athletes, most athletic programs would suffer, and so would the spirit of healthy competition that college sports are known for. 

If you read the example body paragraph above closely, you’ll notice that there’s a topic sentence that supports the claim made in the thesis statement. There’s also evidence given to support the claim made in the topic sentence--a recent study by the NCAA. Following the evidence, the writer interprets the evidence for the reader to show how it supports their opinion. 

Following this topic sentence/evidence/explanation structure will help you construct a well-supported and developed argument that shows your readers that you’ve done your research and given your stance a lot of thought. And that's a key step in making sure you get an excellent grade on your essay! 

Tip 5: Keep the Reader Thinking

The best argumentative essay conclusions reinterpret your thesis statement based on the evidence and explanations you provided throughout your essay. You would also make it clear why the argument about paying college athletes even matters in the first place. 

There are several different approaches you can take to recap your argument and get your reader thinking in your conclusion paragraph. In addition to restating your topic and why it’s important, other effective ways to approach an argumentative essay conclusion could include one or more of the following: 

While you don’t want to get too wordy in your conclusion or present new claims that you didn’t bring up in the body of your essay, you can write an effective conclusion and make all of the moves suggested in the bulleted list above. 

Here’s an example conclusion for an argumentative essay on paying college athletes using approaches we just talked about:

Though it’s true that scholarships and financial aid are a form of compensation for college athletes, it’s also true that the current system of college sports places a lot of pressure on college athletes to behave like professional athletes in every way except getting paid. Future research should turn its attention to the various inequities within college sports and look at the long-term economic outcomes of these athletes. While college athletes aren't paid right now, that doesn’t necessarily mean that a paycheck is the best solution to the problem. To avoid the possibility of making the college athletics system even worse, people must consider the ramifications of paying college students and ensure that paying athletes doesn't create more harm than good.

This conclusion restates the argument of the essay (that college athletes shouldn't be paid and why), then uses the "Future Research" tactic to make the reader think more deeply about the topic. 

If your conclusion sums up your thesis and keeps the reader thinking, you’ll make sure that your essay sticks in your readers' minds.

Should College Athletes Be Paid: Next Steps 

Writing an argumentative essay can seem tough, but with a little expert guidance, you'll be well on your way to turning in a great paper . Our complete, expert guide to argumentative essays can give you the extra boost you need to ace your assignment!

Perhaps college athletics isn't your cup of tea. That's okay: there are tons of topics you can write about in an argumentative paper. We've compiled 113 amazing argumentative essay topics so that you're practically guaranteed to find an idea that resonates with you.

If you're not a super confident essay writer, it can be helpful to look at examples of what others have written. Our experts have broken down three real-life argumentative essays to show you what you should and shouldn't do in your own writing.

Ashley Sufflé Robinson has a Ph.D. in 19th Century English Literature. As a content writer for PrepScholar, Ashley is passionate about giving college-bound students the in-depth information they need to get into the school of their dreams.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

The Case for Paying College Athletes

The case against paying college athletes, the era of name, image, and likeness (nil) profiting, why should college athletes be paid, is it illegal for college athletes to get paid, what percentage of americans support paying college athletes, the bottom line, should college athletes be paid.

The Case For and Against

Should college athletes be able to make money from their sport? When the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) was founded in 1906, the organization’s answer was a firm “no,” as it sought to “ensure amateurism in college sports.”

Despite the NCAA’s official stance, the question has long been debated among college athletes, coaches, sports fans, and the American public. The case for financial compensation saw major developments in June 2021, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA cannot limit colleges from offering student-athletes “education-related benefits.”

In response, the NCAA issued an interim policy stating that its student-athletes were permitted to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL) , but not to earn a salary. This policy will remain in place until a more “permanent solution” can be found in conjunction with Congress.

Meanwhile, the landscape continues to shift, with new cases, decisions, and state legislation being brought forward. College athletes are currently permitted to receive “cost of attendance” stipends (up to approximately $6,000), unlimited education-related benefits, and awards. A 2023 survey found that 67% of U.S. adults favor paying college athletes with direct compensation.

Key Takeaways

• Despite the NCAA reporting nearly $1.3 billion in revenue in 2023, student-athletes are restricted to limited means of compensation.
• Although college sports regularly generate valuable publicity and billions of dollars in revenue for schools, even the highest-grossing college athletes tend to see only a small fraction of this.
• One argument for paying college athletes is the significant time commitment that their sport requires, which can impact their ability to earn income and divert time and energy away from academic work.
• Student-athletes may face limited prospects after college for a variety of reasons, including a high risk of injury, fierce competition to enter professional leagues, and lower-than-average graduation rates.
• The developing conversation around paying college athletes must take into account the practical challenges of determining and administering compensation, as well as the potential impacts on players and schools.

There are numerous arguments in support of paying college athletes, many of which focus on ameliorating the athletes’ potential risks and negative impacts. Here are some of the typical arguments in favor of more compensation.

Financial Disparity

College sports generate billions of dollars in revenue for networks, sponsors, and institutions (namely schools and the NCAA). There is considerable money to be made from advertising and publicity, historically, most of which has not benefited those whose names, images, and likenesses are featured within it.

Of the 2019 NCAA Division I revenues ($15.8 billion in total), only 18.2% was returned to athletes through scholarships, medical treatment, and insurance. Additionally, any other money that goes back to college athletes is not distributed equally. An analysis of players by the National Bureau of Economic Research found major disparities between sports and players.

Nearly 50% of men’s football and basketball teams, the two highest revenue-generating college sports, are made up of Black players. However, these sports subsidize a range of other sports (such as men’s golf and baseball, and women’s basketball, soccer, and tennis) where only 11% of players are Black and which also tend to feature players from higher-income neighborhoods. In the end, financial redistribution between sports effectively funnels resources away from students who are more likely to be Black and come from lower-income neighborhoods toward those who are more likely to be White and come from higher-income neighborhoods.

Exposure and Marketing Value

Colleges’ finances can benefit both directly and indirectly from their athletic programs. The “Flutie Effect,” named after Boston College quarterback Doug Flutie, is an observed phenomenon whereby college applications and enrollments seem to increase after an unexpected upset victory or national football championship win by that college’s team. Researchers have also suggested that colleges that spend more on athletics may attract greater allocations of state funding and boost private donations to institutions.

Meanwhile, the marketing of college athletics is valued in the millions to billions of dollars. In 2023, the NCAA generated nearly $1.3 billion in revenue, $945.1 million of which came from media rights fees. In 2022, earnings from March Madness represented nearly 90% of the NCAA’s total revenue. Through this, athletes give schools major exposure and allow them to rack up huge revenues, which argues for making sure the players benefit, too.

Opportunity Cost, Financial Needs, and Risk of Injury

Because participation in college athletics represents a considerable commitment of time and energy, it necessarily takes away from academic and other pursuits, such as part-time employment. In addition to putting extra financial pressure on student-athletes, this can impact athletes’ studies and career outlook after graduation, particularly for those who can’t continue playing after college, whether due to injury or the immense competition to be accepted into a professional league.

Earning an income from sports and their significant time investment could be a way to diminish the opportunity cost of participating in them. This is particularly true in case of an injury that can have a long-term effect on an athlete’s future earning potential.

Arguments against paying college athletes tend to focus on the challenges and implications of a paid-athlete system. Here are some of the most common objections to paying college athletes.

Existing Scholarships

Opponents of a paid-athlete system tend to point to the fact that some college athletes already receive scholarships , some of which cover the cost of their tuition and other academic expenses in full. These are already intended to compensate athletes for their work and achievements.

Financial Implications for Schools

One of the main arguments against paying college athletes is the potential financial strain on colleges and universities. The majority of Division I college athletics departments’ expenditures actually surpass their revenues, with schools competing for players by hiring high-profile coaches, constructing state-of-the-art athletics facilities, and offering scholarships and awards.

With the degree of competition to attract talented athletes so high, some have pointed out that if college athletes were to be paid a salary on top of existing scholarships, it might unfairly burden those schools that recruit based on the offer of a scholarship.

‘Amateurism’ and the Challenges of a Paid-Athlete System

Historically, the NCAA has sought to promote and preserve a spirit of “amateurism” in college sports, on the basis that fans would be less interested in watching professional athletes compete in college sports, and that players would be less engaged in their academic studies and communities if they were compensated with anything other than scholarships.

The complexity of determining levels and administration of compensation across an already uneven playing field also poses a practical challenge. What would be the implications concerning Title IX legislation, for example, since there is already a disparity between male and female athletes and sports when it comes to funding, resources, opportunities, compensation, and viewership?

Another challenge is addressing the earnings potential of different sports (as many do not raise revenues comparable to high-profile sports like men’s football and basketball) or of individual athletes on a team. Salary disparities would almost certainly affect team morale and drive further competition between schools to bid for the best athletes.

In 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA violated antitrust laws with its rules around compensation, holding that the NCAA’s current rules were “more restrictive than necessary” and that the NCAA could no longer “limit education-related compensation or benefits” for Division I football and basketball players.

In response, the NCAA released an interim policy allowing college athletes to benefit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL) , essentially providing the opportunity for players to profit off their personal brand through social media and endorsement deals. States then introduced their own rules around NIL, as did individual schools, whose coaches or compliance departments maintain oversight of NIL deals and the right to object to them in case of conflict with existing agreements.

Other court cases against the NCAA have resulted in legislative changes that now allow students to receive “cost of attendance” stipends up to a maximum of around $6,000 as well as unlimited education-related benefits and awards.

The future of NIL rules and student-athlete compensation remains to be seen. According to the NCAA, the intention is to “develop a national law that will help colleges and universities, student-athletes, and their families better navigate the name, image, and likeness landscape.” However, no timeline has been specified as of yet.

Common arguments in support of paying college athletes tend to focus on players’ financial needs, their high risk of injury, and the opportunity cost they face (especially in terms of academic achievement, part-time work, and long-term financial and career outlook). Proponents of paying college athletes also point to the extreme disparity between the billion-dollar revenues of schools and the NCAA and current player compensation.

Although the NCAA once barred student-athletes from earning money from their sport, legislation around compensating college athletes is changing. In 2021, the NCAA released an interim policy permitting college athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL) through social media and endorsement and sponsorship deals. However, current regulations and laws vary by state.

In 2023, a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults found that 67% of respondents were in favor of paying college athletes with direct compensation. Sixty-four percent said they supported athletes’ rights to obtain employee status, and 59% supported their right to collectively bargain as a labor union .

Although the NCAA is under growing pressure to share its billion-dollar revenues with the athletes it profits from, debate remains around whether, how, and how much college athletes should be paid. Future policy and legislation will need to take into account the financial impact on schools and athletes , the value of exposure and marketing, pay equity and employment rights, pay administration, and the nature of the relationship between college athletes and the institutions they represent.

NCAA. “ History .”

Marquette Sports Law Review. “ Weakening Its Own Defense? The NCAA’s Version of Amateurism ,” Page 260 (Page 5 of PDF).

U.S. Supreme Court. “ National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston et al. ”

NCAA. “ NCAA Adopts Interim Name, Image and Likeness Policy .”

PBS NewsHour. “ Analysis: Who Is Winning in the High-Revenue World of College Sports? ”

Sportico. “ 67% of Americans Favor Paying College Athletes: Sportico/Harris Poll .”

Sportico. “ NCAA Took in Record Revenue in 2023 on Investment Jump .”

National Bureau of Economic Research. “ Revenue Redistribution in Big-Time College Sports .”

Appalachian State University, Walker College of Business. “ The Flutie Effect: The Influence of College Football Upsets and National Championships on the Quantity and Quality of Students at a University .”

Grand Canyon University. “ Should College Athletes Be Paid? ”

Flagler College Gargoyle. “ Facing Inequality On and Off the Court: The Disparities Between Male and Female Athletes .”

U.S. Department of Education. “ Title IX and Sex Discrimination .”

Congressional Research Service Reports. “ National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston and the Debate Over Student Athlete Compensation .”

NCSA College Recruiting. “ NCAA Name, Image, Likeness Rule .”

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Pros and Cons

Do you know how to improve your profile for college applications.

See how your profile ranks among thousands of other students using CollegeVine. Calculate your chances at your dream schools and learn what areas you need to improve right now — it only takes 3 minutes and it's 100% free.

Show me what areas I need to improve

What’s Covered:

History of the debate: should college athletes be paid, why college athletes should be paid.

• Why College Athletes Shouldn’t Be Paid
• Where To Get Your Essay Edited For Free

College athletics provide big benefits for many schools: they increase their profile, generate millions of dollars in revenue, and have led to one of the most contentious questions in sports— should college athletes be paid? Like other difficult questions, there are good arguments on both sides of the issue of paying college athletes. 

Historically, the debates over paying college athletes have only led to more questions, which is why it’s raged on for more than a century. Perhaps the earliest group to examine the quandary was Andrew Carnegie’s Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, which produced a mammoth study in 1929 of amateur athletes and the profits they generate for their universities. You don’t have to get past the preface to find questions that feel at home in today’s world:

• “What relation has this astonishing athletic display to the work of an intelligence agency like a university?”
• “How do students, devoted to study, find either the time or the money to stage so costly a performance?” 

Many of the questions asked way back in 1929 continue to resurface today, and many of them have eventually ended up seeking answers in court. The first case of note came in the 1950s, when the widow of Fort Lewis football player Ray Dennison took the college all the way to the Colorado Supreme Court in an effort to collect a death benefit after he was killed playing football. She lost the case, but future generations would have more success and have slowly whittled away at arguments against paying athletes. 

The most noticeable victory for athletes occurred in 2019, when California Governor, Gavin Newsom, signed legislation effectively allowing college athletes in the state to earn compensation for the use of their likeness, sign endorsement deals, and hire agents to represent them.

The court fights between college athletes and the NCAA continue today—while not exactly about payment, a case regarding whether or not schools can offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education benefits such as computers, graduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad, and internships was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2021. A decision is expected in June 2021. 

There are a number of great reasons to pay college athletes, many of which will not only improve the lives of student-athletes, but also improve the product on the field and in the arena. 

College Athletes Deserve to Get Paid

In 2019, the NCAA reported $18.9 billion in total athletics revenue. This money is used to finance a variety of paid positions that support athletics at colleges and universities, including administrators, directors, coaches, and staff, along with other employment less directly tied to sports, such as those in marketing and media. The only people not receiving a paycheck are the stars of the show: the athletes. 

A testament to the disparate allocation of funds generated by college sports, of the $18.9 billion in athletics revenue in 2019, $3.6 billion went toward financial aid for student-athletes, and $3.7 billion was used for coaches’ compensation. A February 2020 USA Today article found that the average total pay for Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) college football head coaches in 2020-21 was $2.7 million. The highest-paid college football coach—the University of Alabama’s Nick Saban—earns $9.3 million a year and is the highest-paid public employee in the country. He is not alone, college coaches dominate the list of public employees with the largest salaries. 

If there’s money to provide college coaches with lavish seven-figure salaries (especially at public institutions), why shouldn’t there be funds to pay college athletes? 

Vital Support for Athletes 

A 2011 study published by the National College Players Association (NCPA) found that an overwhelming number of students on full athletics scholarships live below the federal poverty line—85% of athletes who live on campus and 86% athletes who live off-campus. “Full scholarship” itself is a misnomer; the same study found that the average annual scholarship for FBS athletes on “full” scholarships was actually $3,222. Find out more information about athletic scholarships . 

Paying student-athletes would help eliminate the need for these student-athletes to take out loans, burden their families for monetary support, or add employment to their already busy schedules. The NCAA limits in-season practice time to 20 hours a week, but a 2008 NCAA report shows that in-season student-athletes commonly spent upward of 30 and 40 hours a week engaged in “athletic activities.” 

Encouraged to Stay in College Longer

A report produced by the NCPA and Drexel University estimated the average annual fair market value of big-time college football and men’s basketball players between 2011 and 2015 was $137,357 and $289,031, respectively, and concluded that football players only receive about 17% of their fair market value, while men’s basketball players receive approximately 8% of theirs.

If colleges paid athletes even close to their worth, they would provide an incentive for the athletes to stay in college and earn degrees, rather than leaving college for a paycheck. This would also help keep top talents playing for college teams, improve the level of competition, and potentially lead to even higher revenue. On a side note, this would incentivize athletes to complete their degree, making them more employable after the end of their athletic career. 

Limit Corruption 

Just because there are rules prohibiting the compensation of college athletes doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen, and over the years there have been numerous scandals. For example, in 2009, six ex-University of Toledo players were indicted in a point-shaving scheme , and in 2010, Reggie Bush returned his Heisman Trophy after allegations that he was given hundreds of thousands of dollars from sports agents while he played for USC.  

Paying college athletes will likely not totally eliminate corruption from college sports, but putting athletes in a less-precarious financial position would be a good step toward avoiding external influence, especially when you consider some of the players involved in the University of Toledo point-shaving scandal were paid as little as $500. 

It’s a Job (and a Dangerous One) 

As mentioned before, college athletes can put in upward of 40 hours a week practicing, training, and competing—being a “student-athlete” is a challenge when you’re devoting full-time hours to athletics. A New York Times study found a 0.20-point difference in average GPA between recruited male athletes and non-athletes. The difference is less pronounced among females, with non-athletes averaging a 3.24 GPA and recruited women athletes at 3.18.

It’s not just the time commitment that playing college athletics puts on student-athletes, it’s the risk to their health. A 2009-2010 CDC report found that more than 210,000 injuries are sustained by NCAA student-athletes each year. Full athletic scholarships are only guaranteed a year at a time, meaning student-athletes are one catastrophic injury away from potentially losing their scholarship. That is to say nothing of the lasting effects of an injury, like head traumas , which made up 7.4% of all injuries in college football players between 2004 and 2009.

Discover your chances at hundreds of schools

Our free chancing engine takes into account your history, background, test scores, and extracurricular activities to show you your real chances of admission—and how to improve them.

Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

There are a lot of great reasons why college athletes should be paid, but there are also some compelling reasons why college athletes should not be paid—and why not paying athletes is actually good for both the institutions and athletes. 

Compensation Conundrum 

One of the most common reasons cited against paying college players is compensation. Will all college athletes get compensated equally? For example, will the star quarterback receive the same amount as the backup catcher on the softball team? A 2014 CNBC article estimated that Andrew Wiggins, a University of Kansas forward (and soon-to-be first-overall draft pick), had a fair market value of around $1.6 million.

Similarly, will compensation take into account talent? Will the All-American point guard get the same amount as the captain of the swim team? In all likelihood, paying college athletes will benefit big-time, revenue-generating sports and hurt less popular sports. 

Eliminate Competitive Balance 

According to the NCAA , in 2019, the 65 Power Five schools exceeded revenue by $7 million, while all other Division I colleges had a $23 million deficit between expenses and revenue. If college athletes were to get paid, then large, well-funded schools such as those of the Power Five would be best positioned to acquire top talent and gain a competitive advantage. 

From a student’s point of view, paying college athletes will alter their college experience. No longer would fit, college, university reputation, and values factor into their college decisions—rather, choices would be made simply based on who was offering the most money. 

Professionalism vs. the Classroom

There’s a feeling that paying college athletes sends the wrong message and incentivizes them to focus on athletics instead of academics, when the reality is that very few college athletes will go on to play sports professionally. Just 1.6% of college football players will take an NFL field. NCAA men’s basketball players have even slimmer odds of playing in a major professional league ( 1.2% ), while the chances of a professional career are particularly grim for women basketball players, at a mere 0.8% . 

Although the odds of a college athlete turning pro are low, the probability of them earning a degree is high, thanks in part to the academic support athletes are given. According to data released by the NCAA, 90% of Division I athletes enrolled in 2013 earned a degree within six years. 

It Will End Less-Popular, Unprofitable Sports 

If colleges and universities pay their athletes, there is a fear that resources will only go to popular, revenue-generating sports. Programs like football and men’s basketball would likely benefit greatly, but smaller, unprofitable sports such as gymnastics, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, volleyball, and wrestling could find themselves at best cash-strapped and, at the worst, cut altogether. 

It’s just not less-popular sports that paying athletes could threaten—women’s programs could also find themselves in the crosshairs of budget-conscious administrators. Keep in mind, it was just in March 2021 that the NCAA made national news for its unequal treatment of the men’s and women’s NCAA basketball tournaments. 

Financial Irresponsibility 

Former ESPN, and current FOX Sports, personality Colin Cowherd made news in 2014 when he voiced a popular argument against paying college athletes: financial irresponsibility. In Cowherd’s words:

“I don’t think paying all college athletes is great… Not every college is loaded, and most 19-year-olds [are] gonna spend it—and let’s be honest, they’re gonna spend it on weed and kicks! And spare me the ‘they’re being extorted’ thing. Listen, 90 percent of these college guys are gonna spend it on tats, weed, kicks, Xboxes, beer and swag. They are, get over it!”

A look at the professional ranks bolsters Cowherd’s argument about athletes’ frivolous spending. According to CNBC , 60% of NBA players go broke within five years of departing the league and 78% of former NFL players experience financial distress two years after retirement.

Writing an Essay on This? Where to Get Your Essay Edited for Free

Writing an essay on whether college athletes should or shouldn’t be paid? CollegeVine can help! Our peer review tool allows you to receive feedback and learn the strengths and weaknesses of your essay for free.  

Looking for more debate, speech, or essay topics? Check out these other CollegeVine articles for ideas: 

• 52 Argumentative Essays Ideas that are Actually Interesting
• 52 Persuasive Speech Topics That Are Actually Engaging
• 60 Debate Topics for High Schoolers

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

• Bachelor’s Degrees
• Master’s Degrees
• Doctorate Degrees
• Certificate Programs
• Nursing Degrees
• Cybersecurity
• Human Services
• Science & Mathematics
• Communication
• Liberal Arts
• Social Sciences
• Computer Science
• Admissions Overview
• Tuition and Financial Aid
• Incoming Freshman and Graduate Students
• Transfer Students
• Military Students
• International Students
• Early Access Program
• About Maryville
• Our Faculty
• Our Approach
• Our History
• Accreditation
• Tales of the Brave
• Student Support Overview
• Online Learning Tools
• Infographics

Home / Blog

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Reasons Why or Why Not

January 3, 2022 

Tables of Contents

Why are college athletes not getting paid by their schools?

How do student athlete scholarships work, what are the pros and cons of compensation for college athletes, keeping education at the center of college sports.

Since its inception in 1906, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has governed intercollegiate sports and enforced a rule prohibiting college athletes to be paid. Football, basketball, and a handful of other college sports began to generate tremendous revenue for many schools in the mid-20th century, yet the NCAA continued to prohibit payments to athletes. The NCAA justified the restriction by claiming it was necessary to  protect amateurism  and distinguish “student athletes” from professionals.

The question of whether college athletes should be paid was answered in part by the Supreme Court’s June 21, 2021, ruling in  National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, et. al.  The decision affirmed a lower court’s ruling that blocked the NCAA from enforcing its rules restricting the compensation that college athletes may receive.

• As a result of the NCAA v. Alston ruling, college athletes now have the right to profit from their  name, image, and likeness  (NIL) while retaining the right to participate in their sport at the college level. (The prohibition against schools paying athletes directly remains in effect.)
• Several states have passed laws  that allow such compensation. Colleges and universities in those states must abide by these new laws when devising and implementing their own policies toward NIL compensation for college athletes.

Participating in sports benefits students in many ways: It helps them focus, provides motivation, builds resilience, and develops other skills that serve students in their careers and in their lives. The vast majority of college athletes will never become professional athletes and are happy to receive a full or partial scholarship that covers tuition and education expenses as their only compensation for playing sports.

Athletes playing Division I football, basketball, baseball, and other sports generate revenue for their schools and for third parties such as video game manufacturers and media companies. Many of these athletes believe it’s unfair for schools and businesses to profit from their hard work and talent without sharing the profits with them. They also point out that playing sports entails physical risk in addition to a considerable investment in time and effort.

This guide considers the reasons for and against paying college athletes, and the implications of recent court rulings and legislation on college athletes, their schools, their sports, and the role of the NCAA in the modern sports environment.

Back To Top

The reasons why college athletes aren’t paid go back to the first organized sports competitions between colleges and universities in the late 19th century. Amateurism in college sports reflects the “ aristocratic amateurism ” of sports played in Europe at the time, even though most of the athletes at U.S. colleges had working-class backgrounds.

By the early 20th century, college football had gained a reputation for rowdiness and violence, much of which was attributed to the teams’ use of professional athletes. This led to the creation of the NCAA, which prohibited professionalism in college sports and enforced rules restricting compensation for college athletes. The rules are intended to preserve the amateurism of student participants. The NCAA justified the rules on two grounds:

• Fans would lose interest in the games if the players were professional athletes.
• Limiting compensation to capped scholarships ensures that college athletes remain part of the college community.

NCAA rules also prohibited college athletes from receiving payment to “ advertise, recommend, or promote ” any commercial product or service. Athletes were barred from participating in sports if they signed a contract to be represented by an agent as well. As a result of the NIL court decision, the NCAA will no longer enforce its rule relating to compensation for NIL activities and will allow athletes to sign contracts with agents.

Major college sports now generate billions in revenue for their schools each year

For decades, colleges and universities have operated under the assumption that  scholarships are sufficient compensation  for college athletes. Nearly all college sports cost more for the schools to operate than they generate in revenue for the institution, and scholarships are all that participants expect.

But while most sports don’t generate revenue, a handful, notably football and men’s and women’s basketball, stand out as significant exceptions to the rule:

• Many schools that field teams in the NCAA’s Division I football tier  regularly earn tens of millions of dollars  each year from the sport.
• The NCAA tournaments for men’s and women’s Division I basketball championships  generated more than $1 billion in 2019 .

Many major colleges and universities generate a considerable amount of money from their athletic teams:

• The Power Five college sports conferences — the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 12, and Southeastern Conference (SEC) —  generated more than $2.9 billion  in revenue from sports in fiscal 2020, according to federal tax records reported by  USA Today .
• This figure represents an increase of $11 million from 2019, a total that was reduced because of restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
• In the six years prior to 2020, the conferences recorded collective annual revenue increases averaging about $252 million.

What are name, image, likeness agreements for student athletes?

In recent years some college athletes at schools that field teams in the NCAA’s highest divisions have protested the restrictions placed on their ability to be compensated for third parties’ use of their name, image, and likeness. During the 2021 NCAA Division I basketball tournament known familiarly as March Madness, several players wore shirts bearing the hashtag “ #NotNCAAProperty ” to call attention to their objections.

Following the decision in NCAA v. Alston, the NCAA  enacted a temporary policy  allowing college athletes to enter into NIL agreements and other endorsements. The interim policy will be in place until federal legislation is enacted or new NCAA rules are created governing NIL contracts for college athletes.

• Student athletes are now able to sign endorsement deals, profit from their use of social media, and receive compensation for personal appearances and signing autographs.
• If they attend a school located in a state that has enacted NIL legislation, they are subject to any restrictions present in those state laws. As of mid-August 2021,  40 states had enacted laws  governing NIL contracts for college athletes.
• If their school is in a state without such a law, the college or university will determine its own NIL policies, although the NCAA prohibits pay-for-play and improper recruiting inducements.
• Student athletes are allowed to sign with sports agents and enter into agreements with school boosters so long as the deals abide by state laws and school policies.

Within weeks of the NCAA policy change, premier college athletes began signing NIL agreements with the potential to  earn them hundreds of thousands of dollars .

• Bryce Young, a sophomore quarterback for the University of Alabama, has nearly $1 million in endorsement deals.
• Quarterback Quinn Ewers decided to skip his last year of high school and enroll early at Ohio State University so he could make money from endorsements.
• A booster for the University of Miami pledged to pay each member of the school’s football team $500 for endorsing his business.

How will the change affect college athletes and their schools?

The  repercussions of court decisions and state laws  that allow college athletes to sign NIL agreements continue to be felt at campuses across the country, even though schools and athletes have received little guidance on how to manage the process.

• The top high school athletes in football, basketball, and other revenue-generating college sports will consider their potential for endorsement earnings while being recruited by various schools.
• The first NIL agreements highlight the disparity between what elite college athletes can expect to earn and what other athletes may realize. On one NIL platform, the average amount earned by Division I athletes was $471, yet one athlete made $210,000 in July alone.
• Most NIL deals at present are for small amounts, typically about $100 in free apparel, in exchange for endorsing a product on social media.

The presidents and other leaders of colleges and universities that field Division I sports have not yet responded to the changes in college athlete compensation other than to reiterate that they do not operate for-profit sports franchises. However, the NCAA requires that  Division I sports programs  be self-supporting, in contrast to sports programs at Division II and III institutions, which receive funding directly from their schools.

Many members of the Power 5 sports conferences have reported shortfalls in their operations, leading analysts to anticipate  major structural reforms  in the governing of college sports in the near future. The recent changes have also caused some people to believe the  NCAA is no longer relevant  or necessary.

How do highly competitive athletic scholarships work? According to the NCAA and Next College Student Athlete: $3.6 billion+ in athletic scholarships are awarded annually, and 180,000+ student athletes receive scholarships every year. Additionally, about 2% of athletes win a sports scholarship; college coaches award scholarships based on athletic ability; full scholarships are given for the top six college sports categories; and athletic scholarships are renewable each year.

The primary financial compensation student athletes receive is a scholarship that pays all or part of their tuition and other college-related expenses. Other forms of financial assistance available to student athletes include  grants, loans, and merit aid .

• Grants  are also called “gift aid,” because students are not expected to pay them back (with some exceptions, such as failing to complete the course of study for which the grant was awarded). Grants are awarded based on a student’s financial need. The  four types of grants  awarded by the U.S. Department of Education are  Federal Pell Grants ,  Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants ,  Iraq and Afghanistan Service Grants , and  Teacher Education Assistance for College or Higher Education (TEACH) Grants .
• Loans  are available to cover education expenses from government agencies and private banks. Students must pay the loans back over a specified period after graduating from or leaving school, including interest charges. EducationData.org estimates that as of 2020, the  average amount of school-related debt  owed by college graduates was $37,693.
• Merit aid  is awarded based on the student’s academic, athletic, artistic, and other achievements.  Athletic scholarships  are a form of merit aid that typically cover one academic year at a time and are renewable each year, although some are awarded for up to four years.

Full athletic scholarships vs. partial scholarships

When most people think of a student athlete scholarship, they have in mind a  full-ride scholarship  that covers nearly all college-related expenses. However, most student athletes receive partial scholarships that may pay tuition but not college fees and living expenses, for example.

A student athlete scholarship is a nonguaranteed financial agreement between the school and the student. The NCAA refers to full-ride scholarships awarded to student athletes entering certain Division I sports programs as  head count scholarships  because they are awarded per athlete. Conversely, equivalency sports divide scholarships among multiple athletes, some of whom may receive a full scholarship and some a partial scholarship. Equivalency awards are divided among a team’s athletes at the discretion of the coaches, as long as they do not exceed the allowed scholarships for their sport.

These Division I sports distribute scholarships per head count:

• Men’s football
• Men’s basketball
• Women’s basketball
• Women’s volleyball
• Women’s gymnastics
• Women’s tennis

These are among the Division I equivalency sports for men:

• Track and field
• Cross-country

These are the Division I equivalency sports for women:

• Field hockey

All Division II and National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) sports programs distribute scholarships on an equivalency basis. Division III sports programs do not award sports scholarships, although other forms of financial aid are available to student athletes at these schools.

How college athletic scholarships are awarded

In most cases, the coaching staff of a team determines which students will receive scholarships after spending time scouting and recruiting. The NCAA imposes  strict rules for recruiting student athletes  and provides a guide to help students  determine their eligibility  to play college sports.

Once a student has received a scholarship offer from a college or university, the person may sign a national letter of intent (NLI), which is a voluntary, legally binding contract between an athlete and the school committing the student to enroll and play the designated sport for that school only. The school agrees to provide financial aid for one academic year as long as the student is admitted and eligible to receive the aid.

After the student signs an NLI, other schools are prohibited from recruiting them. Students who have signed an NLI may ask the school to release them from the commitment; if a student attends a school other than the one with which they have an NLI agreement, they lose one full year of eligibility and must complete a full academic year at the new school before they can compete in their sport.

Very few student athletes are awarded a full scholarship, and even a “full” scholarship may not pay for all of a student’s college and living expenses. The  average Division I sports scholarship  in the 2019-20 fiscal year was about $18,000, according to figures compiled by ScholarshipStats.com, although some private universities had average scholarship awards that were more than twice that amount. However, EducationData.org estimates that the  average cost of one year of college  in the U.S. is $35,720. They estimate the following costs by type of school.

• The average annual cost for an in-state student attending a public four-year college or university is $25,615.
• Average in-state tuition for one year is $9,580, and out-of-state tuition costs an average of $27,437.
• The average cost at a private university is $53,949 per academic year, about $37,200 of which is tuition and fees.

Student athlete scholarship resources

• College Finance, “Full-Ride vs. Partial-Ride Athletic Scholarships”  — The college expenses covered by full athletic scholarships, how to qualify for partial athletic scholarships, and alternatives to scholarships for paying college expenses
• Student First Educational Consulting, “Athletic Scholarship Issues for 2021-2022 and Beyond”  — A discussion of the decline in the number of college athletic scholarships as schools drop athletic programs, and changes to the rules for college athletes transferring to new schools

According to College Strategic, Fansided, and Future of Working, reasons why paying college athletes is fair include: 1. Playing sports resembles a full-time job. 2. Sports take time away from studies. 3. Sports generate corporate profits. 4. Pay minimizes athlete corruption. 5. Pay provides spending money. 6. Playing sports creates injury risk. 7. Sports elevate school brands. 8. Pay motivates performance. 9. Scholarships reduce poverty.

There are many reasons why student athletes should be paid, but there are also valid reasons why student athletes should not be paid in certain circumstances. The lifting of NCAA restrictions on NIL agreements for college athletes has altered the landscape of major college sports but will likely have little or no impact on the majority of student athletes, who will continue to compete as true amateurs.

Reasons why student athletes should be paid

The argument raised most often in favor of allowing college athletes to receive compensation is that  colleges and universities profit  from the sports they play but do not share the proceeds with the athletes who are the ultimate source of that profit.

• In 2017 (the most recent year for which figures are available), the NCAA recorded $1.07 billion in revenue. The organization’s president earned $2.7 million in 2018, and nine other NCAA executives had salaries greater than $500,000 that year.
• Elite college coaches earn millions of dollars a year in salary, topped by University of Alabama football coach Nick Saban’s $9.3 million annual salary.
• Many of the athletes at leading football and basketball programs are from low-income families, and the majority will not become professional athletes.
• College athletes take great physical risks to play their sports and put their future earning potential at risk. In school they may be directed toward nonchallenging courses, which denies them the education their fellow students receive.

Reasons why student athletes should not be paid

Opponents to paying college athletes rebut these arguments by pointing to the primary role of colleges and universities: to provide students with a rewarding educational experience that prepares them for their professional careers. These are among the reasons they give for not paying student athletes.

• Scholarships are the fairest form of compensation for student athletes considering the financial strain that college athletic departments are under. Most schools in Division I, II, and III spend more money on athletics than they receive in revenue from the sports.
• College athletes who receive scholarships are presented with an opportunity to earn a valuable education that will increase their earning power throughout their career outside of sports. A Gallup survey of NCAA athletes found that  70% graduate in four years or fewer , compared to 65% of all undergraduate students.
• Paying college athletes will “ diminish the spirit of amateurism ” that distinguishes college sports from their professional counterparts. Limiting compensation for playing a sport to the cost of attending school avoids creating a separate class of students who are profiting from their time in school.

According to Best Colleges, Salarship, and CollegeVine, reasons why paying college athletes is less than ideal include: 1. Money may harm students. 2. Pay diminishes love of the game. 3. Pay deemphasizes academic purpose. 4. Secondary sports struggle. 5. Rich schools monopolize talent. 6. The financial benefit is marginal. 7. Setting salaries can be messy. 8. Academic requirements are substandard. 9. Other program budgets are reduced.

How do college athlete endorsements work?

Soon after the Supreme Court released its decision in NCAA v. Alston, the NCAA issued  guidelines for schools  that allow college athletes to make money from product endorsements, social media accounts, autographs, and other uses of their name, image, or likeness. This counters the NCAA’s longstanding opposition to student athletes profiting from endorsements. At present, implementation of the guidelines varies from school to school and state to state, which means athletes at some institutions may benefit more from NIL agreements than those attending other schools.

Several  NIL consultancy firms  are actively soliciting endorsements from college athletes in the aftermath of the rule change.

• Highly touted 19-year-old basketball recruit Hercy Miller, who joined the Tennessee State University basketball team in 2021, signed a $2 million endorsement deal with Web Apps America.
• University of Michigan quarterback Cade McNamara has entered into an endorsement deal with cryptocurrency company More Management that will  pay him in cryptocurrency .
• Twin sisters Haley and Hanna Cavinder of the Fresno State University basketball team have  marketing agreements  to promote Boost Mobile and Six Star Pro Nutrition to the 3.3 million followers of their TikTok account.
• Gable Steveson, a wrestler for the University of Minnesota, entered into an endorsement deal with the delivery service Gopuff; Steveson has 245,000 followers on Instagram and 30,000 on Twitter.

Despite the rush of high-profile college athletes signing endorsement deals, some educators and analysts express concern about the  impact of the endorsements  on schools, athletes, and college sports.

• Schools with more favorable endorsement rules may entice student athletes away from the schools they are currently attending.
• Likewise, states that have enacted endorsement laws that provide more earning potential for college athletes may see more top recruits choosing to attend schools in those states.
• The time college athletes spend meeting the requirements of their endorsement contracts could detract from study and practice time. This can have an adverse effect on their education and athletic careers — if they are unable to maintain grade requirements, for example, they may be disqualified from playing.
• If a college athlete’s performance in the sport declines, they may be less likely to attract and retain endorsement deals. While the NCAA has banned NIL agreements based on the athlete meeting specific performance criteria, the group acknowledges that a student’s athletic performance  may enhance their NIL value .
• Because of complicated contracts and tax laws, student athletes will have to rely on agents, advisers, and managers, which may leave them vulnerable to exploitation.

From the onset of intercollegiate sports, students have benefited from their participation by learning dedication to their sport, building relationships, and being part of a team. Sports allow students to acquire many important values, such as fair competition and physical and mental health. Education should remain at the forefront of all aspects of college, including sports, whether or not collegiate athletes are paid.

Infographic Source

Best Colleges, “Should College Athletes Be Paid?”

College Strategic, “Why College Athletes Should Be Paid”

CollegeVine, “Should College Athletes Be Paid? Pros and Cons”

Fansided, “64 Reasons College Athletes Need to Be Paid”

Future of Working, “17 Advantages and Disadvantages of Paying College Athletes”

NCAA, “Scholarships”

Next College Student Athlete, “What Are the Different Types of Offers I Could Get?”

Salarship, “Should College Athletes Be Paid: Pros and Cons”

Bring us your ambition and we’ll guide you along a personalized path to a quality education that’s designed to change your life.

Take Your Next Brave Step

Receive information about the benefits of our programs, the courses you'll take, and what you need to apply.

The Aspen Institute

©2024 The Aspen Institute. All Rights Reserved

• 0 Comments Add Your Comment

The History Behind the Debate Over Paying NCAA Athletes

April 23, 2018  • Jon Solomon

The Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program held a conversation May 1 in Washington, DC titled “Future of College Sports: Reimagining Athlete Pay.” The discussion was livestreamed at as.pn/collegesportsfuture. The Aspen Institute discussion explored the implications if NCAA athletes could be paid by outside entities for use of their names, images, and likenesses, like any college student.

While speaking at the Aspen Institute in 2016, NCAA president Mark Emmert raised concerns that University of Texas swimmer Joseph Schooling had recently received a $740,000 bonus from Singapore for winning a gold medal at the 2016 Olympics. Schooling didn’t just win gold; he was Singapore’s first Olympic gold medalist and beat the great Michael Phelps.

This payment was perfectly permissible under NCAA rules, which since 2001 have allowed US Olympians to compete in college while pocketing tens of thousands of dollars (and sometimes six figures) from the United States Olympic Committee for winning gold, silver, or bronze. The NCAA added an exception in 2015 to also allow international athletes to receive bonuses.

Still, a college swimmer making nearly three-quarters of a million dollars concerned some NCAA members because, Emmert said, “that’s a little different than 15 grand for the silver medal for the US of A. … The members at that time hadn’t anticipated this phenomenon of like the Singaporean kid getting paid a very large amount.”

Never mind that NCAA rules allow two-sport athletes to be paid professionals in one sport while competing in a different college sport, such as Kyle Parker’s $1.4 million baseball signing bonus while serving as Clemson’s quarterback in 2010. Or that tennis players can receive up to $10,000 per year in prize money (and additional cash on a per-event basis) before or during college. Or that college football players can receive bowl gifts up to $550 in value, which can involve players selecting high-tech electronics from a gift suite or receiving a Visa gift card. Or that schools have student-assistance funds to help athletes financially, including paying five-figure insurance policies for elite athletes who want to protect their professional futures.

Emmert’s description of his membership’s concerns about the swimming bonus reflects the never-ending definition of NCAA amateurism. Amateurism is whatever the NCAA says amateurism is at any particular moment.

As US District Judge Claudia Wilken wrote in her 2014 ruling in the Ed O’Bannon v. NCAA antitrust lawsuit case against the NCAA over the commercialized use of players’ names, images and likenesses: “The association’s current rules demonstrate that, even today, the NCAA does not necessarily adhere to a single definition of amateurism.”

The challenges are adding up for the NCAA both in the courtroom and in the court of public opinion. Speaking at a 2017 meeting of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, Emmert released internal NCAA polling showing that among all Americans, 79 percent say major universities value money ahead of college athletes.

“I can’t think of anything 79 percent of Americans agree to,” Emmert said, “but they agree to that.”

Such is the state of college sports. How America’s college sports system got here – the only country in the world to attach a highly-commercialized, multibillion-dollar industry to higher education, thus resulting in ongoing legal challenges and public criticism – is a long story. Three key events help trace the journey.

1. Why NCAA athletes are called student-athletes

The term “student-athlete” is ingrained in the college sports vernacular. NCAA-organized press conferences involve a moderator seeking questions for any of the “student-athletes,” a term that historically comes to define the NCAA’s perceived moral authority and its justification for existence.

It’s a term rooted in legal calculations. Walter Byers, the NCAA’s first executive director, created “student-athlete” in the 1950s to help the NCAA fight against workmen’s compensation insurance claims for injured football players.

“The student-athlete was a term used to try to offset these tendencies for state agencies or other governmental departments to consider a grant-in-aid holder” to be an employee, Byers said in court testimony during the 1990s. Soon, the term “student-athlete” became embedded in all NCAA rules and interpretations.

“Student-athlete” first surfaced when the widow of Ray Dennison, who died from a head injury in 1955 while playing in Colorado for the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies, filed for workmen’s compensation death benefits. The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with the defendant that Dennison’s widow was not eligible for benefits because the college was “not in the football business.”

“The term student-athlete was deliberately ambiguous,” Pulitzer Prize-winning author Taylor Branch wrote in The Atlantic in 2011. “College players were not students at play (which might understate their athletic obligations), nor were they just athletes in college (which might imply they were professionals). That they were high-performance athletes meant they could be forgiven for not meeting the academic standards of their peers; that they were students mean they did not have to be compensated, ever, for anything more than the cost of their studies. Student-athlete became the NCAA’s signature term, repeated constantly in and out of courtrooms.”

Athletes may be receiving degrees, but many examples show that pockets of athletes are not receiving a quality education.

The student-athlete defense helped the NCAA win – and avoid – numerous liability cases through the years. The most notable win was a lawsuit brought by former Texas Christian University (TCU) running back Kent Waldrep, who was paralyzed in a 1974 football game against the University of Alabama. TCU stopped paying his medical bills after nine months and the Waldrep family coped for years on charity.

Shortly after NCAA Division I schools began carrying catastrophic insurance for football players in 1991, Waldrep sued. He claimed he was an employee of TCU at the time of his injury and covered by workers compensation laws. Waldrep initially won $70 a week for life and medical expenses dating to the accident, but TCU’s insurance carrier appealed.

Finally, in 2000, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that Waldrep was not an employee because he and TCU intended for him to participate in sports as a student. As part of its decision, the Texas Supreme Court wrote that a basic purpose of the NCAA was to make the student-athlete an integral part of the student body, and cited the definition of an amateur student-athlete from the NCAA bylaws: “one who engaged in athletics for the education, physical, mental, and social benefits he derives therefrom, and to whom athletics is an avocation.”

The power of the student-athlete label has played out in legal circles and in the public narrative. Today, the NCAA promotes that more than 460,000 student-athletes compete in 24 sports per year, and more than eight in 10 student-athletes will earn a bachelor’s degree. The value of a college degree is viewed very favorably by many Americans, especially as tuition costs continue to skyrocket that causes students to carry college-loan debt well into adulthood.

Yet the money keeps growing in college sports. The combined revenue for the five major conferences (SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12) increased by 266 percent from 2005-15, according to the Knight Commission. In 2015, the 53 public schools from the five major conferences paid their football coaching staffs (530 individuals) a combined $405.5 million, compared to $179.8 million in scholarships to their football players (4,979 individuals).

In recent years, the NCAA changed some rules to allow new benefits for athletes. Schools can expand the value of athletic scholarships to include cash stipends of a couple thousand dollars to cover athletes’ full cost of attendance. The NCAA now lets schools provide unlimited meals to athletes. The Pac-12 in 2014 became the first conference to guarantee athletes who are injured in college competition will have medical expenses covered up to four years by the school; the other four major conferences recently agreed to a minimum two-year standard for medical expenses covered after college.

But the criticism for the NCAA hasn’t subsided. The NCAA’s academic mission has increasingly been called into question. Athletes may be receiving degrees, but many examples show that pockets of athletes are not receiving a quality education. Some of them essentially major in eligibility – that is, they take (and are sometimes directed to) easier majors/courses in order to stay on the field.

The most glaring example occurred when the University of North Carolina was found by outside parties to have organized fake classes that enabled dozens of athletes to gain and maintain their eligibility. In a ruling last year that caused considerable confusion and frustration among NCAA members, the NCAA did not penalize North Carolina. The NCAA said no association rules were broken because the fraudulent classes were not available exclusively to athletes; other students had access to the courses, too. An independent report commissioned by North Carolina found that of the 3,100 students who took the fake classes over 18 years, 47.4 percent were athletes.

The North Carolina scandal also has played out in state and federal court, where the NCAA argued that it “did not voluntarily assume a legal duty to ensure the academic integrity of courses offered by its member institutions.” The NCAA enforcement model “creates no legal duty to prevent NCAA members from violating NCAA rules,” the association wrote.

North Carolina avoided NCAA penalties by essentially arguing that the NCAA should stay out of irregularities in college courses. This caused many critics to say that the NCAA must decide whether it’s going to continue to be involved in other academic matters, such as:

• Approving or withholding initial NCAA eligibility for players based on their high school transcript and curriculum
• Progress toward degree requirements for college athletes to stay eligible
• Penalties against schools, including postseason bans, if individual teams don’t meet Academic Progress Rate benchmarks showing their players are progressing toward a degree

“Maybe we’ve just reached the point where if a university is going to cheat academically, the public needs to look to the university and university leadership and say, ‘Does winning mean that much to you?’” retired North Carolina Supreme Court Justice Bob Orr, co-counsel in a lawsuit against the NCAA involving the North Carolina scandal, told CBSSports.com in 2016. “Instead, they turn to this outside organization with inconsistent standards and limited resources.”

If the NCAA ever removed itself entirely from academics and became solely an organizer of sporting events, that could pose a significant threat to the association’s current nonprofit model. The entire enterprise is designed around the notion that providing access to an education is sufficient compensation to players for their participation in a multibillion-dollar industry.

After all, the NCAA tells us, these players are student-athletes.

2. 1984 Supreme Court decision shifted the power to conferences

Perhaps more than anyone else, the late Supreme Court Justice Byron “Whizzer” White saw the challenges coming for the NCAA. White essentially predicted so much of this – the commercialization, the defections for TV cash, the NCAA’s struggles to protect amateurism – when he wrote the dissenting opinion in the landmark NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents case that ended the NCAA’s monopoly over college football television contracts.

“By mitigating what appears to be a clear failure of the free market to serve the ends and goals of higher education,” White wrote in 1984, “the NCAA ensures the continued availability of a unique and valuable product, the very existence of which might well be threatened by unbridled competition in the economic sphere.”

The NCAA once controlled football television – who got the exposure on TV and how the money was distributed to schools. The University of Oklahoma and University of Georgia sued to change the power structure. An appellate court and the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision that the NCAA’s control over football TV contracts was illegal.

The Supreme Court handed down a 7-2 decision against the NCAA. The only justice joining White in dissension was William Rehnquist. White warned that the court was making a mistake by “subjugating the NCAA’s educational goals … to the purely competitive commercialism of [an] ‘every school for itself’ approach to television contract bargaining.”

After the decision, schools began merging into larger conferences and ended the once-common practice of independent status. Conferences soon held the power in football – and as football’s popularity grew in America, the sport became the financial engine for athletic departments. Conferences began to negotiate lucrative media rights deals, stage championship games and secure their own bowl games, and ultimately produce college football’s first national championship format.

Today, the conferences now stage the College Football Playoff, which is worth about $470 million annually. Many of them have their own television network. During fiscal year 2017, the SEC distributed on average $41 million to each of its 14 universities, according to USA Today. Ten years ago, the SEC average payout per school was $11 million. The Big Ten Conference is projected to exceed $50 million in its average payout.

There’s another legacy of the 1984 ruling: Buried within the NCAA’s landmark loss was a Supreme Court gift that kept on giving for 30 more years. In the middle of the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens dropped in limited language that states “athletes must not be paid”:

“… moreover, the NCAA seeks to market a particular brand of football – college football. The identification of this ‘product’ with an academic tradition differentiates college football from and makes it more popular than professional sports to which it might otherwise be comparable, such as, for example, minor league baseball. In order to preserve the character and quality of the ‘product,’ athletes must not be paid, must be required to attend class, and the like.”

There were just three sentences in a 19,000-word brief. The topic (player compensation) had nothing to do with the issue at hand (football TV contracts). No one testified about player compensation, and Stevens didn’t appear to give much rigorous thought to what he was writing.

Stevens didn’t define what “paid” means. Does that mean salaries from the school, endorsements from outside entities, or checks written as part of scholarship agreements?

Stevens didn’t explain what “required to attend class” means. Does that mean a part-time student or full-time student, or perhaps attend only one class? How would Stevens interpret “required to attend class” today when compared to how frequently NCAA athletes miss school to travel to play in games? In a 2015 survey, Division I men’s basketball players said they spent an average of 1.7 days a week away from campus and missed 2.2 classes. The Wall Street Journal found that eight top-25 men’s basketball teams in 2018 traveled an average of more than 42 days during the season.

Though NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents wasn’t about compensation for college athletes, Stevens’ five words – “athletes must not be paid” – became a valuable source for many NCAA legal victories in future years. That changed when the O’Bannon case challenged the NCAA’s restrictions preventing football and men’s basketball players from being paid for the licensing use of their names, images, and likenesses (NILs).

Wilken, the judge in O’Bannon v. NCAA , concluded that while NCAA v. Oklahoma Board of Regents “gives the NCAA ‘ample latitude’ to adopt rules preserving ‘the revered tradition of amateurism in college sports’ … it does not stand for the sweeping proposition that student-athletes must be barred, both during their college years and forever thereafter, from receiving any monetary compensation for the commercial use of their names, images and likenesses.”

Andy Coats, the lawyer for Oklahoma and Georgia in the 1984 Supreme Court case, said it was only a matter of time before players sought a slice of the TV pie.

“They’re saying, ‘Look, we’re generating this money either by our play or the fact you take my image and sell it, and it’s not fair,’” Coats told CBSSports.com in 2014.

The money grew too big. The time had come for legal challenges on behalf of the players.

Tom McMillen, who oversees the athletic director association for the NCAA’s largest division, sums up a critical question this way: If schools could pay players, who would athletic directors predominantly pay – the players or the coaches? Surveys show ADs don’t currently support constraining coaches’ salaries, McMillen said.

“The system has allowed coaches’ compensation to explode so it’s a fair question,” McMillen said. “If that hadn’t happened, I think the pressure on paying athletes would be far less today. You can’t have a market place where one side wins and another side doesn’t win. You can’t expect one side to be constrained forever. I said that in my book in 1991. I think it holds even more true today.”

3. Impact of Ed O’Bannon v. NCAA

The next chapter of challenges against the NCAA is still being written. The results will be based in part on the O’Bannon ruling – the legal precedent set, how college athletes are more cognizant of the money around them, and the public’s opinion about amateurism and what it even means.

The O’Bannon case ended up with victories for both sides. The plaintiffs won a decision that certain NCAA amateurism rules violate federal antitrust law. The court determined that those rules constituted an anti-competitive conspiracy by the NCAA schools and conferences to deny men’s basketball and football players monetary value for their NILs. This potentially leaves the NCAA vulnerable for more antitrust challenges.

On the other hand, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Wilken’s remedy to the violations: Allow schools, if they so desire, to pay players up to $5,000 per year while they are in college with payment coming after they leave school. Rejecting the remedy was a win for the NCAA. Today, the NCAA clings to a new definition of amateurism through the O’Bannon appellate decision, which tied educational expenses to athlete compensation.

“The difference between offering student-athletes education-related compensation and offering them cash sums untethered to educational expenses is not minor; it is a quantum leap,” two Ninth Circuit judges wrote in 2015.

Legal threats continue against the NCAA. Two lawsuits that challenge the NCAA’s current compensation limits for athletes continue – including the Martin Jenkins case led by attorney Jeffrey Kessler, who brought free agency to the NFL – envision an NCAA in which conferences and/or schools would be free to make their own independent determinations about how to fairly compensate athletes.

The ongoing NCAA college basketball scandal showed that under-the-table payments to players by coaches, financial advisors, and shoe companies are common in the sport.

Wilken, the judge in O’Bannon, recently ordered the lawsuits to trial starting Dec. 3. She essentially left the NCAA with only two arguments to use at trial: The notion that fans are drawn to college football and basketball “in part due to their perception of amateurism,” and the idea that “paying student-athletes would detract from the integration of academics and athletics in the campus community.” The results of the trial, and inevitable appeals, could dramatically reshape the NCAA.

According to McMillen, 79 percent of athletic directors in the NCAA’s highest football subdivision support players making money off their name for non-athletic related activities, and 26 percent favor giving players the right for athletic-related pursuits. Emmert, the NCAA president, has said the Olympic model – athletes receiving sponsor money in exchange for use of their name, image and likeness – is deserving of serious consideration inside the context of college sports.

“I hate to say this, I think the plaintiff lawyers are slowing this down,” McMillen said. “If you didn’t have a court case now, I think college sports could have addressed this. Now, the lawyers will say they’ve made progress because of the court cases. It’s what comes first – the chicken or the egg? But when a court case’s fundamental principle is tethered to education, it’s a slippery slope no one will touch right now. I think the ADs are more sympathetic to (players making money off their NIL) provided some of their concerns are addressed. They don’t want it to be an abusive recruiting tool.”

The NCAA’s history has been to legally fight most attempts to increase benefits for athletes. The NCAA fought two court cases over expanding the value of the traditional athletic scholarship to include additional money that covers miscellaneous costs of attending college. Now, thousands of NCAA athletes who received traditional scholarships, rather than the new cost-of-attendance version, will be compensated for the difference. Last year, the NCAA and 11 major conferences settled for $208.7 million in the Shawne Alston lawsuit, which was impacted by the O’Bannon decision.

The ongoing NCAA college basketball scandal brought by federal prosecutors reflected, not surprisingly, that under-the-table payments to players by coaches, financial advisors and shoe companies are common in the sport. Three criminal cases are tied to the FBI investigation, which has resulted in 10 arrests, including charges against assistant basketball coaches at Auburn, Oklahoma State, Arizona and Southern California.

According to a Yahoo! Sports report in February, federal documents show an underground recruiting operation that could create NCAA rules issues for at least 20 Division I basketball programs – including Duke, North Carolina, Texas, Kentucky, Michigan State, Southern California, and Alabama – and more than 25 players. The amounts of impermissible benefits reported by Yahoo! Sports for one sports agency ranged from $70 for a lunch with a player’s parents to tens of thousands of dollars and loans to a former North Carolina State player.

“These allegations, if true, point to systematic failures that must be fixed and fixed now if we want college sports in America,” Emmert said in a statement in February 2018. “Simply put, people who engage in this kind of behavior have no place in college sports. They are an affront to all those who play by the rules.”

Yet the reality is value does exist for some players above their athletic scholarship. That was highlighted in the O’Bannon case. A vice president of videogame maker Electronic Arts Sports testified that his company wants to pay players for the right to use their NILs in popular NCAA videogames that have been discontinued. EA Sports previously used the likeness of players without their permission, resulting in a $60 million settlement with plaintiffs. The average payout was expected to be around $1,600, with some players receiving several thousand dollars depending on how frequently their likeness appeared in the videogame.

A slight majority of American adults (52 percent) still believe a full scholarship is adequate compensation for a college athlete, according to a 2017 nationwide poll by The Washington Post and the University of Massachusetts Lowell. The racial divide was noteworthy: 54 percent of black Americans support paying NCAA athletes based on revenue they generate, whereas only 31 percent of white Americans support the concept.

Gaining public traction is the idea of allowing players to make money if their NIL is sold through merchandise (66 percent of Americans are in favor). A racial gap exists here as well: 89 percent of blacks say athletes should be paid for use of their NIL, while 60 percent of whites are in favor.

Some proponents of paying players argue for a free market that would reallocate the money flowing to coaches, administrators and facility upgrades to the athletes. Others argue for Congress to provide a limited antitrust exemption for college athletic departments so they could impose caps on coach pay and other athletic spending in exchange for athletes to be guaranteed more benefits, including money through use of their NIL.

“My own personal view: There could be ways to do licensing with players and make sure the companies are legit,” McMillen said. “You could set up an independent, voluntary clearinghouse where the licensing staff would negotiate on behalf of all the student-athletes, much like they do in the pros. In taking this step to help elite student-athletes, like Olympic athletes can do today, it might help reduce the ever-growing pressure for universities to pay student-athletes, and that would undermine the whole college sports model.”

In 2014, Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick made the rare public case by an AD that college sports could manage group licensing for athletes to be paid immediately. He argued that the NCAA’s problems stem from years of rules that differentiate athletes from the general student body, such as not allowing players to make money off their own name.

“You could have a group-licensing approach and say, OK, this group licensee can do a deal with EA Sports for student-athlete image and likeness, and we’ll go to EA Sports and negotiate it for all of the student-athletes,” Swarbrick told CBSSports.com. “Here’s what it’s worth if you wear the jersey in the EA Sports video(game) and here’s what it’s worth if you don’t. You get a market read on it and you distribute it based on the way all group licenses work.”

Nothing in the NCAA’s history suggests it would proactively take such an approach. Allowing players to be paid by outside entities might require a court ruling, federal legislation and/or a player boycott. Big 12 Conference commissioner Bob Bowlsby predicted in 2015 that the day will come when players decide not to play in a major college sporting event.

The Olympics once passionately believed in the evolving definition of amateurism. Paid professional athletes were not allowed. During the 1980s, the move toward professionalism gradually gained full steam sport by sport over several years. The change was aided in part by the suspicion that athletes from some Eastern Bloc nations were already professionals anyway through full-time support and training by their governments.

The public hasn’t stopped watching the Olympics with professionals. Making money through endorsements while being good at a sport doesn’t seem to hurt interest in the Olympics, which once had the most stringent definition of amateurism. In 1960, athletes who simply had decided to turn pro were no longer amateurs under Olympic rules.

College sports is gradually changing amateurism definitions, too. Times change, as reflected by some NCAA members’ concerns in 2016 about allowing an Olympian to get paid $740,000 while still competing in college. Some money is OK, in the view of NCAA members, but where’s the limit?

If swimmers and gymnasts can be paid for winning at the Olympics, why not basketball and football players for other forms of outside compensation? If $740,000 is deemed too much for Schooling to accept from Singapore while swimming for the University of Texas, why would American swimmer Katie Ledecky making $115,000 from the Olympics be OK to swim at Stanford? And for that matter, since Ledecky made $115,000 from Olympic success, why did NCAA rules prevent her from making endorsement money and cause her to turn pro early?

Once a line has been crossed to pay athletes, what makes one amount acceptable and another unacceptable?

That’s NCAA amateurism – a floating definition that’s always evolving, consistently inconsistent, and forever under scrutiny.

Jon Solomon is editorial director of the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program. He was an award-winning college sports reporter for 18 years, most recently at CBSSports.com.

Related Posts

April 17, 2023 Sports & Society Program

August 29, 2022 Tom Farrey

The best of the Institute, right in your inbox.

Sign up for our email newsletter

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

An Argument For Not Allowing College Athletes To Earn Compensation

NPR's Mary Louise Kelly speaks with Ekow Yankah, author of The New Yorker essay, "Why N.C.A.A. Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid," about the NCAA's decision to allow college athletes to earn compensation.

MARY LOUISE KELLY, HOST:

The NCAA makes close to a billion dollars in revenue each school year, but college players see none of that money. Now that might change. Yesterday, the NCAA's Board of Governors voted to permit student-athletes to benefit from the use of their name, image and likeness. Now, some see this as addressing an unfair practice of exploitative behavior by the NCAA. Others see this as a lousy idea.

Here to discuss is Ekow Yankah. He's a professor at Cardozo School of Law. He has written about this, an essay in The New Yorker back in 2015 titled "Why NCAA Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid." He joins me now from London.

Welcome to ALL THINGS CONSIDERED.

EKOW YANKAH: Thank you for having me.

KELLY: What did you make of this announcement yesterday?

YANKAH: Like most people, we're all sort of waiting to see what the announcement means. The NCAA often tries to do the vaguely right thing when it has absolutely no other choice. So I take it that this is a capitulation of what they see coming down the pike in terms of a slew of laws that are passing from state to state and threatened federal action.

KELLY: But I gather you think this is a lousy idea. You're in the lousy idea camp. How come?

YANKAH: Well, I'm torn about the name and likeness issue, which is slightly different than paying the athletes. But at bottom, the reason I'm concerned is because I think this will be awfully hard to distinguish from salaries. I consistently worry about the continued professionalization of college athletics.

Look; there's no question that the current system is deeply exploitative and deeply problematic. I guess my baseline worry is many people - I think people in good faith - see the exploitation, and they say the answer is to pay these young athletes some amount of money while they're playing football or basketball. I look, and I say the answer is to make sure that these young men - and with the revenue generated in sports, it's typically young men - that they get the thing that they were promised that was of value. That is to say they get a college degree that was of value.

And one of the things I worry about is how many of, at least the listeners to NPR, those who have opportunity and resources - how many of them would trade a college degree for their child for three years of their child being paid in college? I doubt that's a trade that your listeners would make. Those are not the dreams I have for my children.

KELLY: So in your view, should anything change in the current system?

YANKAH: Yeah. I think everybody agrees that the current system needs to be changed and that the corruption of the current system is untenable and, indeed, deeply racially scarred. I'm not interested in whether or not even my beloved Wolverines crank out three or four professionals a year. I'm interested in universities that can crank out generations of black lawyers and doctors and engineers.

It seems to me that the best way to make sure that we are actually serving these young men is to do our best to support and create a true minor league system.

KELLY: Similar to the way it works in Europe already.

YANKAH: Similar to the way it works in Europe. Young kids who want to play for Manchester United are playing in soccer camps from when they're young. Every year, they get cut down. But the ones who dream of playing on the big stage pursue through the minor league system - and similar to the way it works in baseball and, by the way, similar to the way it works in hockey in the United States.

KELLY: I want to make this personal. You played soccer a little bit in college. New college athlete - would you have wanted to get paid?

YANKAH: Maybe in this way I'm a little bit pushed the other way. I played very briefly when Michigan was a club team. In order to keep playing, I would've had to pay money to play. I was working a full-time job in college on top of scholarships. I would've been thrilled to be able to play, just not to pay. And so in this way, I am one of the people who truly thinks that sports are actually a part of an education. You know, we don't think of the dancers as not students, and we don't think of the chess players as not students.

KELLY: The chess team isn't bringing in a billion dollars every year, though.

YANKAH: No, that's true. That's absolutely right. And I think, you know, that's a concern. On the other hand, if there was a true professional league where the students who wanted to make their money could go make their money, then the university could look the student-athletes in the eye and be quite clear that the revenue generation was more about the university than any particular student-athlete. That is to say if your skills are the kind for which you can get paid, you can go to the minor league and get paid.

KELLY: That's Ekow Yankah. He is a professor at Cardozo School of Law, and he wrote an essay for The New Yorker titled "Why NCAA Athletes Shouldn't Be Paid."

Ekow Yankah, thanks.

YANKAH: Thank you for having me.

Copyright © 2019 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

College athletes still are not allowed to be paid by universities − here’s why

Instructional Associate Professor, Sport Management, University of Florida

Disclosure statement

Cyntrice Thomas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Florida provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Ever since July 1, 2021, student-athletes have been able to pursue endorsement deals . But when it comes to getting paid by the universities for which they play, the students have been shut down. Here, Cyntrice Thomas, a professor of sport management at the University of Florida, answers questions about the hurdles that stand in the way of college athletes being compensated for their athleticism.

What stands in the way of paying college sports players?

NCAA rules are the main obstacle.

Not long after it was formed in 1906 , the NCAA prohibited schools from compensating student-athletes for their athletic ability. In 1948, the NCAA adopted the Sanity Code , which also prohibited athletic scholarships for students who couldn’t demonstrate financial need or economic hardship.

The organization began to allow athletic scholarships in 1956 without regard to financial need. But that was limited to tuition, room and board, and books.

Over time the NCAA has made more allowances, such as funding for medical insurance and by creating the Student Assistance Fund. The fund is meant to “ cover unforeseen expenses ” related to attending college .

Are the rules being challenged?

In 2009, Ed O'Bannon , a former UCLA basketball player, sued the NCAA over its rules that limited the amount in scholarships that schools could offer as well as the compensation for student-athletes with regard to the use of their image in video games. O'Bannon was successful in showing that the NCAA’s rules were unlawful, and the court allowed for schools to offer scholarships up to the cost of attendance .

Most recently, in 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in NCAA v. Alston that colleges must be allowed to compensate students for education-related expenses up to $5,980 annually. The Supreme Court found that the NCAA rules against this were a violation of antitrust law. The purpose of antitrust law is to protect and promote competition in the marketplace to keep prices competitive for consumers.

NCAA rules negatively affected competition because schools could offer only up to the cost of attendance in scholarships – not additional incentives that may attract student-athletes.

Currently, several lawsuits – including Johnson v. NCAA , Carter v. NCAA and House v. NCAA – have plaintiffs using different legal arguments to challenge NCAA rules that limit their access to compensation. In Carter v. NCAA, the plaintiffs claim the limitations on compensation are unlawful and that they are entitled to a share of the million-dollar television contracts of the conferences and NCAA.

Why are ‘name, image and likeness’ deals not enough?

States have passed laws that require student-athletes to be compensated by third parties for the use of their name, image and likeness . These laws directly contradict past NCAA rules that made this type of compensation an explicit NCAA violation because they threaten the notion of amateurism.

However, these laws do not apply to schools and universities. The laws apply only to third parties such as corporations like Gatorade or sport manufacturers like Nike, and that’s where these laws arguably fall short. Schools can continue to make millions of dollars from intercollegiate athletics without having to share that with student-athletes.

Schools and universities, however, can continue to use student-athletes’ names and images to promote their sports and do not have to compensate them. This is because NCAA rules prohibit schools from compensating student-athletes for their publicity or fame related to athletic ability.

Barbara Osborne , a sports scholar at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, argues that through scholarships, student-athletes do receive compensation. However, when recognizing that Division I schools, especially those in a Power Five conference, generate billions of dollars in revenue , other scholars, such as Mark Nagel and Richard Southall , argue that a scholarship is insufficient and that “profit-athletes,” as he refers to them, deserve the fair market value of their labor.

Instead of paying their athletes, schools pour the revenue they make back into the athletic departments and use it to fund salaries, operating costs, facilities and other expenses. This can include funding other sports that do not generate revenue.

Who has the power to change things?

The NCAA, for one. However, the NCAA sees change as the end of amateurism . In fact, at its most recent convention in January, the organization restated its hopes of regaining some of its power to regulate intercollegiate athletics . Specifically, it plans to do this by seeking legal protection from the continuous threat of lawsuits. The organization is also lobbying Congress to declare that student-athletes are not employees .

Another possibility is for schools and universities, specifically those in the Power Five conferences, to simply leave the NCAA . They could then create their own governing body with rules that allow for schools to pay student-athletes, which would allow them to get the best recruits and make more money.

A third possibility is the federal government. Because of the number of legal challenges to the NCAA rules brought by current and former student-athletes, the NCAA has tried to lobby Congress. The organization spent over $750,000 lobbying Congress to create limitations on athlete pay . They also sought to get Congress to pass laws that limit name, image and likeness deals and give the organization an exemption from antitrust laws .

There is reluctance from members of Congress , however, to support an exemption for the NCAA. Some congressional members have actually advocated for more protections for student-athletes. For example, several senators have been working on a bipartisan bill that would include protections for student-athletes with regard to medical care and agent certification.

• Higher education
• Advertising
• Compensation
• Broadcasting
• US higher education
• National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)
• College athletics
• college football
• College basketball
• Higher ed attainment
• Broadcast TV

Faculty of Law - Academic Appointment Opportunities

Operations Manager

Senior Education Technologist

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Essay Examples & Guide

• 👍 Advantages
• 👎 Disadvantages
• 💡 Essay Topics
• 📑 Outlining Your Paper
• 💸 Essay Example #1
• 🙅 Essay Example #2

🔗 References

There are a lot of benefits of doing sports in college, for everyone except the athletes themselves. Surely, your sports achievements can get you recognition and respect. But the issue here is not being paid at all.

You see, sport is arduous labor. And any labor, according to common sense, must be rewarded with a salary. On the other hand, doing sports for the sake of sports can also be justified. There is no clear answer for “Should college athletes be paid?”. Writing an essay, though, can help you find it.

⚖️ Should College Athletes Be Paid: Pros and Cons

This matter is very recent. Therefore, there is a lot of space for discussion here. Some may say that athletes are paid. They actually get scholarships for their work.

Others may argue that only 1% of all the sportspeople get the full amount of money. Both statements are true, and the correct answer doesn’t really exist. To help you form your own opinion on the topic, here are some pros and cons:

• It would be fair to pay sportspeople for their hard work.
• The sport takes a lot of time from studies, and it must be compensated.
• The health risk is very high, and the reward for it is a must.
• The sport would become an excellent alternative for a work-study job.
• Many athletes’ families require monetary support, which athlete payments can give.
• A lot more people would be attracted to doing sports.
• The athletes already enjoy enough compensations.
• The amount of actual future sports pros is depressing.
• It can undermine the overall studying experience.
• Most of the sports programs cannot afford salaries.
• It would create room for inequity.
• Mixing studying and sports would become even more difficult due to increased demand.
• The concept of playing for the love of sports would cease to exist.

We will look into them deeper in the next section.

👍 Paying College Athletes: Advantages

• It is simply fair to pay athletes for their endeavors. A single sportsperson can generate millions of dollars for their college. It would be only fair if the stars themselves got at least some of this money.
• It is a great way to compensate for taking away from studies. Sport is a time-consuming activity. And time is a valuable thing when you are a student. Let’s not forget that college athletes also need time to study. Or at least compensation for the time they put into the sport.
• The money would at least partially make up for possible injuries. While health is priceless, risking it must be rewarded properly. And that’s exactly what college athletes do. They put their well-being on the line for their universities. Unfortunately, universities don’t seem to give the favor back.
• It would be a great way to substitute work. An average athlete puts 40 hours a week into doing sports for his college. You can easily compare this amount of time to a generic work-study job. The only difference is the latter brings you money, and the former does not.
• It’s a great way to motivate athletes to continue their sports careers. After graduation, the majority of college athletes will stop playing for their team. They are far more likely to simply find a job and get a steady income. Paying them would make a choice between sports and career not that obvious.
• It would support a lot of students’ families. While college sportspeople bath in success, their families often suffer financially. Sustaining a starting athlete can be really costly at times. That’s where a salary would be a saving grace for struggling families.
• It is a great motivation for more students to pursue a sports career. The possibility of making money will attract more people into playing for a sports team. And that brings a better chance to find young talent.

👎 Paying College Athletes: Disadvantages

• The athletes already have their compensations. The coach’s advice, the medical treatment, the strength training. All of these cost money. But the athletes don’t have to pay a single cent for these and many other services. They are provided for free as compensation already.
• Not a lot of athletes will actually become professionals. Out of all college athletes, a mere 2% go pro as a result. Most of them see doing sports as a way to receive education and nothing more.
• It can harm other colleges’ programs. Since the salary would come from the college budget, there would be inevitable cutbacks. As a result, every student in the institution suffers.
• There are not many sports that make a profit. More often than not, sport doesn’t bring a lot of money. Exceptions are basketball and football. Should football players make more money than, for example, swimmers? Here’s where the next issue occurs.
• Possible inequity. You see, if some students participate in a sport that has no profit, then why pay them? As a result of such logic, whole college teams will cease to exist.
• Possible study problems. With the appearance of salaries, the expectations from the players will rise. Attending training sessions and games will become a definite must. No skips would be allowed. In this case, ping-ponging your priorities from sports to studies is much more difficult.
• The love for the game would go away. College students play sports mostly because they want to do what they love. Paying them might destroy the compassion for doing sport. The amateur leagues will be filled with players who are in it for the money and nothing else.

💡 Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay Topics

• Balancing college sports and academic mission .
• Payments to collegiate athletes .
• Top college athletes are worth six figures.
• Title IX in the female sports development .
• Kids and sports: Lack of professional sports guides .
• College athletes do not deserve the degrees they’re studying for.
• Steroid abuse in the world of sports .
• Shortage of officials at the high school sports level .
• College sports should be made professional.
• Steroid use effects on professional young athletes .
• Is it justified for college athletes to be paid ?
• College sports should not require missing classes.
• Professional athletes allowed to use steroids.
• Paying college athletes: Reinforcing privilege or promoting growth ?
• If colleges pay college athletes, it would increase the disparity between small and bigger college teams.
• School athletes and drug tests.
• Arguments for adequate remuneration for college athletes .
• The NCAA definition of college athletes as amateurs is outdated.
• Sports-related problems and conflicts.
• African American studies. Negro baseball league.
• The moral side: “A gentlemen never competes for money” (Walter Camp).
• Running injuries, workout and controversies.
• Should college athletes be paid ?
• Ed O’Bannon’s lawsuit: Using athletes’ images in video games.
• Does youth sports play a part in character formation?
• Children participation in sports .
• Where does college sports money go?
• Sports analysis: steroids and HGH in sports.
• Steroid usage in professional sports.
• College athletes work as marketers for their college, as their success in sports improves admission rates.
• Physical activity and sports team participation.
• Using performance-enhancing drugs and in the world of sport .
• Research handbook of employment relations in sport .
• Successfully luring college athletes .
• College athletes should be paid .

Haven’t found anything inspiring in the list above? Try using our topic-generating tool !

📑 Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay Outline

Before writing your work, the first thing you want to do is outline. An argumentative-style essay would be perfect for writing on our topic.

We will go with a generic 5-paragraph format :

• Hook. A flashy sentence or two to evoke interest in your work. A joke or a shocking fact, for example.
• Background information. General info that the reader needs to know before going deeper into the essay.
• Thesis statement. It is a sentence that reflects the main idea of the further text. It leaves room for debate and briefly showcases the arguments you will discuss further.
• Body. The body is the biggest part of your work. In our case, it will be three paragraphs long. Each paragraph names and explains the argument you want to make.
• Conclusion. The end of your essay. Nothing new should be added. Just restate your thesis, summarize the points you made in the body, and be done with it.

💸 Why College Athletes Should Be Paid Essay Example

In 2017 National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) made over $1.04 billion in revenue. None of the college athletes have seen any part of this sum. A survey made the same year showed 60% of the sportspeople to be satisfied with the scholarship-only payments. The situation, however, has drastically changed over the years. The same 60% now agree that college athletes need monetary compensation. While college athletes' payments are a controversial topic, their hard work and health must be fairly compensated no matter what, and a salary seems to be the best way for it.

It is no surprise that doing sports consumes a solid number of things. Time is one of them. An average college student puts in their sports activities 35 hours a week. It can be compared to having a generic work-study job. The only difference is the job brings you money as any hard labor should. However, in the case of college sport, it seems to profit anyone but the athletes themselves. While the NCAA executives make six-figure salaries, the players, the actual stars of the competition, have the status of the unpaid workforce.

Another thing consumed by sports activities is health. In 2017 over 60% of all Division I players were reported to suffer a major injury. Although, this phenomenal danger to athletes' well-being seems to go unnoticed as well. The only "compensation" provided to people who risk their soundness for the sake of university is education itself. Usually, the health risk is considered a reason for a salary raise. Unfortunately, in our case, there is nothing to give a raise to.

Putting yourself to the fullest in any activity must be rewarded. And the sportspeople truly give it their best. Time, passion, health, everything is given. And for now, everything they give is given for nothing.

🙅 College Athletes Should Not Be Paid Essay Example

There are hundreds of sports college athletes do. Only two of them bring the college profit. The issue of paying the students involved with the college sports activities has been around for a while. Some are satisfied with their scholarship and the possibility to get an education. Others, however, demand more tangible rewards for their achievements. While payments may seem justified, the fact that the athletes already receive enough compensation for their work via scholarship and education is often overlooked.

National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) reports more than $3.6 billion in athletic scholarships to be provided annually to more than 180,000 student-athletes. A simple calculation shows $20.000 a year for each athlete. This sum is more than enough to cover the average cost of an academic year of $17,797.

Furthermore, most college athletic programs make barely enough money to sustain themselves, not to mention paying salaries. The only two kinds of sport that make enough profit to afford salaries are football and basketball. Others, sadly, do not. And this fact creates a significant equity problem. Do we pay all players equally? And if not, who do we pay more? All these questions remain unanswered.

While it seems just, creating salaries brings more problems than solves. The extent of the compensation necessary is, of course, negotiable. But all efforts made by college athletes are compensated in some way. That is a fact.

We hope that this info helped you with your assignment. Make sure to let us know what part you’ve found the most useful in the comments. And also, check out our title page maker . And good luck with your studies!

• 16 college athletes already getting paid under new NCAA rule
• Should College Athletes Be Paid? | BestColleges
• Should College Athletes Be Paid? Reasons Why or Why Not
• All college athletes in California can now get paid – KTVU
• Pay for Play: Should College Athletes Be Compensated?

Research Paper Analysis: How to Analyze a Research Article + Example

Film analysis: example, format, and outline + topics & prompts.

Why Should College Athletes Be Paid, Essay Sample

One of the most pressing issues in college sports is the debate over whether or not college athletes should be paid. This topic has gained significant attention in recent years, with many arguing that it is only fair for college athletes to receive compensation for their hard work, dedication, and revenue-generating contributions. This free essay sample from Edusson will explore the various reasons why college athletes should be paid and will provide a comprehensive analysis of the issue.

Time Commitment and Workload

College athletes put in a tremendous amount of time and effort into their sport, often at the expense of their studies and personal life. As a student-athlete, I know firsthand the dedication it takes to balance academics and sports. We have rigorous practice schedules, intense training sessions, and games that require travel, leaving little time for anything else. Many athletes have to miss classes or sacrifice study time to attend competitions or travel with their teams. The workload of a college athlete can be overwhelming and can negatively impact their academic performance and mental health. Some may argue that athletes receive scholarships and other benefits, but these do not fully compensate for the amount of time and effort they put into their sport. Paying college athletes would help to alleviate some of the financial burden that many student-athletes face, while also compensating them for their time and workload.

Financial Struggles

As a student, I believe that college athletes should be paid for their hard work and dedication to their sports. One of the main reasons for this is the financial struggles that many college athletes face. These athletes come from low-income families and often struggle to make ends meet while attending college. They are unable to work part-time jobs to earn extra income due to the rigorous demands of their sport. This creates a challenging situation where they are unable to support themselves or their families financially. Paying college athletes would provide much-needed financial support and alleviate some of their financial struggles. This would allow them to focus on their studies and athletics without the added stress of financial instability. It would also give them the opportunity to contribute financially to their families, which many of them are unable to do currently. In short, paying college athletes would help alleviate the financial burdens they face and provide a fair compensation for their hard work and dedication to their sport.

Health and Safety Risks

As college athletes compete at a high level, they put their bodies on the line and are exposed to various health and safety risks. These athletes often play through injuries, which can exacerbate the severity of the injury, resulting in long-term physical damage. Therefore, it’s essential to consider the health and safety risks associated with college sports. Paying college athletes would acknowledge the risks that they take and provide a safety net if they get hurt. Furthermore, college athletes who are injured may not have access to the same level of healthcare as professional athletes. Paying them would help ensure they have the proper medical care and resources to recover from injuries. Moreover, paying college athletes could also incentivize schools to prioritize athlete safety and ensure that their health is a top priority. Overall, providing financial compensation to college athletes for the risks they take and the injuries they sustain is not only fair but also necessary for their wellbeing.

Revenue Generation

One of the main arguments in favor of paying college athletes is that they deserve to be compensated for their role in generating revenue for their universities and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). When fans attend a college sports event or purchase team merchandise, they are supporting the team and the entire athletic program. The athletes who are responsible for the success of these programs, however, do not receive any monetary compensation for their efforts. It is unfair that the NCAA and universities benefit from the work of college athletes without providing them with fair compensation. It is also worth noting that college sports have become a commercial enterprise, with the NCAA and universities treating them as such. Many top college sports programs generate millions of dollars in revenue every year, and the athletes who contribute to this success are essential to the financial health of their respective programs. However, athletes often struggle to make ends meet due to the demands of their sport, and they don’t have the time or resources to work part-time jobs to earn extra income.

Fairness and Equity

As college athletes put in countless hours of hard work and dedication to their respective sports, it’s only fair to compensate them for their efforts. However, one aspect that often goes unnoticed is the lack of rights and privileges that college athletes are subjected to, especially when it comes to earning money from their name, image, and likeness.

It is unfortunate that college athletes are the only ones on campus who are not allowed to monetize their skills and talents. This is in stark contrast to everyone else on campus, including musicians, artists, and actors, who can earn money from their talents while attending college. This discrepancy can cause a sense of injustice among college athletes who are forced to watch others monetize their talents while they are restricted from doing so.

In recent years, the issue of fairness and equity has gained considerable attention, and rightfully so. Paying college athletes would go a long way in promoting fairness and equity among all students. It would ensure that athletes have the same rights and opportunities as other students, allowing them to monetize their skills and talents just like everyone else. Additionally, paying college athletes would help eliminate the economic disparities that exist on campuses, especially among low-income athletes who may not have the financial support they need to sustain themselves.

Furthermore, paying college athletes would promote gender equality. Female athletes have historically been paid less than male athletes, even at the professional level. This inequality also extends to college sports, where female athletes often receive less funding and attention than their male counterparts. By paying college athletes, regardless of gender, colleges and universities would help bridge this gap and promote equality among all athletes.

In this table, we will outline some of the main reasons why college athletes should be paid.

Related posts:

• College Research Paper Example
• Freedom of Speech Argumentative Essay
• Exploring My Motivations for Pursuing a Supervisory Role
• The Importance of Women’s Choice: Exploring the Reasons Why Abortion Should Be Legal Essay

Improve your writing with our guides

Youth Culture Essay Prompt and Discussion

Reasons Why Minimum Wage Should Be Raised Essay: Benefits for Workers, Society, and The Economy

Why Marijuana Should Not Be Legal: Potential Risks and Drawbacks

Get 15% off your first order with edusson.

Connect with a professional writer within minutes by placing your first order. No matter the subject, difficulty, academic level or document type, our writers have the skills to complete it.

100% privacy. No spam ever.

Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons Essay

Human capital can be defined as a collection of knowledge, habits, and personal creativity that are important in performing labor with the goal of producing an economic value. From an economic perspective, human capital is associated with the ability of a state or an organization to improve performance outcomes significantly.

It is important to differentiate human capital from monetary capital, which does not grow for a long period. In fact, even its short-term growth trends are not always linear. Over the years, there has been a debate about whether students participating in college sports activities should be paid. This paper seeks to develop an argument to support the idea of rewarding college athletes with money on a regular basis.

Ross Eisenbrey states that the utilization of the unpaid labor of students on internships has been on the increase over the past ten years. He contends that if an individual works for any firm or person for financial gains, then he or she should be paid for his or her services. This is irrespective of whether individuals are students or graduates. Colbert claims that students who participate in athletic competitions on behalf of their colleges should be paid.

Based on the human capital model, the scope of athletics in colleges represents a positive contribution to human development and well-being. The model has six domains that should be considered before one can decide whether college athletes should be paid.

These are physical capital, emotional capital, individual capital, social capital, intellectual capital, and financial capital. For the purpose of the argument in this paper, financial capital is given a priority. It refers to gains with regard to earning power, productivity, and work attainment.

Some athletes come from low-income families. Thus, they can hardly sustain themselves. When they engage in college sports events, they cannot find time to look for jobs that would provide them with a regular source of income. It is evident that a significant amount of the funds generated from athletics is used to support other games, such as basketball and football. However, if students participating in athletics would be paid by institutions of learning, then they would focus on studying and developing their careers in sports.

In an era where the internet is playing a great role in broadcasting athletics events at colleges, it is no doubt that the institutions of learning are making huge profits, some of which can be used to reward the participating students financially.

Some college students qualify for scholarship grants that cater for expenses, such as travel and food. However, it is important to note that not all expenses are covered by the grants, implying that student athletes would hardly meet the demand of catering for their needs because most of their time is spent in sports exercises and practices.

It is notable that some team members engage in abuses, such as illegally taking cash from boosters. This can be avoided by remunerating them. Athletes may sustain injuries that might negatively impact them in the long-term. Although colleges might cater for their medical bills in the short-term, they might not cater for their health care for a long period. If student athletes would be paid, then they would cater for the long-term expenses in relation to treating injuries.

That notwithstanding, paying the students would lead to high levels of inequality in colleges due to the fact that some would feel that their efforts in other activities are not being appreciated. In addition, paying athletes in colleges is not supported by the law. Thus, a move to pay them could be challenged in a court of law, which could lead to huge financial implications.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, March 25). Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons. https://ivypanda.com/essays/paying-college-athletes-pros-and-cons/

"Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons." IvyPanda , 25 Mar. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/paying-college-athletes-pros-and-cons/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons'. 25 March.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons." March 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/paying-college-athletes-pros-and-cons/.

1. IvyPanda . "Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons." March 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/paying-college-athletes-pros-and-cons/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Paying College Athletes: Pros and Cons." March 25, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/paying-college-athletes-pros-and-cons/.

• College Athletics: Should College Athletes Be Paid?
• Risk Management in Athletics
• Athletic Trainers as Professionals in Inclusion and Diversity in Sport
• The Purpose of College Athletics
• College Athletics for Mental and Physical Health
• Intercollegiate Athletics Commercialization
• Trends in the External Environment That Affect Athletics Paper
• The Merits and Demerits of Paying Student-Athletes for Participating In College Sports
• Sports Demands and Stress Management in Athletics
• College Athletes Have a Right to Be Paid
• Revision of sport issues
• Juwan Howard's Power Play
• Student-Athletes and Socialization
• Coaching Philosophy
• Athletic Administration and Coaching: Statement of the Problem

As ‘avalanche’ hits NCAA and paying players debate continues, change is coming

With College Football Playoff expansion and NCAA men’s basketball tournament rights totaling $2.4 billion annually and women’s basketball’s most marketable player in history — Iowa’s Caitlin Clark — launching her sport to unprecedented television viewership, collegiate sports appear healthy, vibrant and lucrative. That goes for everyone except the participants.

Advertisement

Questions are brewing from college officials to legal scholars about whether athletes should receive a piece of the postseason revenue. Those discussions have spilled over to athlete rights and employment status, both of which likely will be determined in federal court.

NCAA president Charlie Baker, who spoke briefly before Sunday’s women’s championship game, said he wants “to make some changes to how support for student-athletes works in Division I.”

“We’ve done a number of things that are ready to deal with that, but I’m not going to get ahead of the membership on that sort of thing,” Baker said. “I’m sure it’s a conversation we’ll be having.”

But where does the membership stand on paying players? Judging from a recent panel discussion at the University of Iowa, legal scholars and experts are all over the place. With lawsuits threatening to blow apart the current amateur model and the prospect of a college football super league looming in case it does, the questions are endless. But authorities agree change is coming — fast.

“The avalanche has officially hit the NCAA,” said Dan Matheson, Iowa’s director of sport and recreation management program and a former NCAA associate director of enforcement.

Why is the NCAA proposing a new subdivision? Explaining the related legal battles

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 9-0 Alston ruling in 2021, which allowed athletes to receive compensation for name, image and likeness (NIL), legal issues continue to mount for the NCAA. A National Labor Relations Board regional director ruled this year that Dartmouth men’s basketball players are employees . In a complaint filed with the NLRB and testimony ongoing, the National College Players Association considers USC athletes employees of the university, the Pac-12 and the NCAA. In addition, a class-action antitrust lawsuit regarding past NIL rights could cost the NCAA and its membership more than $5 billion.

With players allowed to generate income off their NIL, employment is the last step in the blurry barrier between amateur and professional status. It’s the most difficult one for most experts to navigate because no one can agree on the parameters. Is it just the athletes from revenue-generating sports or all of them? How will it impact Title IX? How much will each athlete earn? Will non-revenue sports survive?

Looking forward to a riveting panel discussion AND 2.0 CLE hours for all you lawyers in the area! There’s a livestream option here: https://t.co/6iM16S9F7y pic.twitter.com/TZSgHoCUga — Dan Matheson (@DanMatheson) March 27, 2024

Alicia Jessop, a Pepperdine sports administration professor who doubles as the school’s NCAA faculty athletics representative, demanded the NCAA shift course and accept that athletes are employees. Jessop, a member of the NCAA Division I men’s basketball oversight committee and a practicing attorney, argued that putting up resistance and talk of collateral damage is “fear-mongering.”

“The NCAA continues to unsuccessfully and to the tune of millions of dollars in lobbying fees try to persuade Congress to grant it antitrust immunity,” Jessop said. “The likelihood of Congress passing such bills is as good as Caitlin Clark not being the No. 1 overall WNBA draft pick.”

Husch Blackwell law partner Jason Montgomery, a former NCAA lead investigator, disagreed.

“It’s clear that the NCAA is on the worst losing streak in sports since the Bills’ four Super Bowl losses. They are terrible at litigating,” he said. “But current and well-established law in this country says that college athletes are not employees. The Department of Labor says they’re not employees. No federal court has ever said they’re an employee.”

Universities are concerned employee status and compensation would bankrupt athletics departments. Paying athletes could force some departments to eliminate many non-revenue sports, which form the lifeblood of Olympic rosters. Nevius Legal attorney Libby Harmon, who worked as a lead NCAA investigator for 10 years and also served as compliance director at Michigan, said of the 626 athletes for Team USA in the 2020-21 Olympics, 76 percent were current or former athletes from 171 different institutions.

To Jessop, any attempt to trim Olympic sports is an excuse. She cited numbers from USA Today that most Division I coaches averaged a 15.3 percent salary increase in 2021 — after the pandemic financially crushed many departments — plus soaring salaries alongside modest scholarship increases. In the 2023 fiscal year, Ohio State athletics spent more than $90.7 million on coaches and staff salaries while paying $23.8 million for athletic scholarships, according to figures obtained by The Athletic . Harmon brought up Texas A&M’s $75 million buyout of football coach Jimbo Fisher saying, “That could fund Division I athletic departments multiple times over.”

“Don’t buy that there is no money in the system,” Jessop said. “This will require the reallocation of funds. Top college coaches will see pay reductions, strength trainers will no longer earn $1 million per year.”

Inside the CFB 'Super League' pitch some execs see as a way to save the sport

Still, it is naïve to expect athletics departments not to continue to invest in football and men’s basketball, the only two sports that generate profits at most power conference schools. Disrupting the system to include employee status, Montgomery argued, could bring it all down. Over the last three years, athletes now have money-making opportunities from NIL, full-ride scholarships up to the cost of attendance and around $6,000 each year in educational rewards.

“The popularity of college sports is at an all-time high,” Montgomery said. “The popularity of television in college sports is at an all-time high. Women’s sports are at an all-time high. And NCAA membership schools in the system produce the most Olympic athletes. So things are going really good in college sports. Let’s change everything. That makes very little business sense and it makes very little practical sense.”

In addition, if athletes are considered employees, programs could hire and fire them based strictly on performance.

“If student-athletes become employees, what does that relationship look like?” asked Josh Lens, an Arkansas sports and recreation professor, who formerly worked in Baylor ’s compliance office. “I think it becomes more of an arm’s length relationship between the athletics department and coaches and their athletes, and it resembles more of a professional mode.

“There are great coaches out there and great people out there who truly care about their athletes; that doesn’t necessarily go away. But I think the dynamic changes if an athlete knows that they can have their scholarship taken away.”

So what happens in five or 10 years? Most experts believe changes will take place, including those who want the current system to remain in place. But how extreme remains up for debate.

“This domino is going to fall. It’s not if, it’s when,” Jessop said. “There’s going to be widespread employees at some colleges.”

“I think it’s either going to be some employment model or some other revenue-sharing model. Either way, athletes are going to be compensated outright in the next five years,” Harmon said. “What that looks like remains to be seen.”

“I vehemently disagree that we should change our successful model that is the envy of the world to go to an employment-based model,” Montgomery said. “We can come up with different distributions, and there are areas certainly that the collegiate model needs to improve in. But I think it’s still going to be litigated in the next five years.”

Some believe a school or a conference will direct revenue toward athletes. Lens said he knows plenty of athletic administrators who want to bargain with their athletes right now.

“The NCAA might try to kick them out,” Lens said, “but somebody is going to take a very progressive step and do that on their own.”

Many, if not most, athletic departments are preparing for the next step and want closure as soon as possible. In an interview with The Athletic , Iowa athletic director Beth Goetz said, “There’s not a day that goes by where we’re not talking about what the future of college athletics would look like.” That also includes discussion of a super football league , reported last week by The Athletic , in which one entity would control college football with a union and collective bargaining. That would offload the antitrust issues the NCAA perpetually faces.

“We all want what’s best for college athletics and college sports and if you’re really trying to figure that out, putting limits on ideas that come out, I don’t know if that always makes sense,” Goetz said about the football super league. “Whether or not this is something that we really should pursue, I don’t know yet. But there might be some pieces of that that actually lead to a solution. … I think those are good conversation starters.”

 (Photo: Steph Chambers / Getty Images)

Get all-access to exclusive stories.

Subscribe to The Athletic for in-depth coverage of your favorite players, teams, leagues and clubs. Try a week on us.

Scott Dochterman is a staff writer for The Athletic covering the Iowa Hawkeyes. He previously covered Iowa athletics for the Cedar Rapids Gazette and Land of 10. Scott also worked as an adjunct professor teaching sports journalism at the University of Iowa.

Why it’s High Time College Athletes Got Paid

This essay about the debate on whether college athletes should be paid argues strongly in favor of compensation. It highlights the significant revenue college sports generate, contrasted with the athletes’ lack of financial reward beyond scholarships. Addressing concerns against payment, such as the potential to undermine the educational spirit of college sports, the essay suggests these are outweighed by the ethical need to fairly compensate athletes for their contributions and risks. It proposes solutions like stipends or allowing athletes to profit from their own image, emphasizing that the current system undervalues the hard work and dedication of student-athletes. The essay makes a case for evolving the compensation model in college sports to ensure fairness and recognize the true value athletes bring to their institutions.

How it works

Let’s talk about the big elephant in the room in college sports: why aren’t the athletes getting paid yet? Picture this: college sports, especially the biggies like football and basketball, are pulling in cash by the truckload. We’re talking millions from TV deals, ticket sales, and all that branded merch. Yet, the stars of the show, the athletes themselves, are basically working their tails off for a pat on the back and a free meal plan. Sure, scholarships are nothing to sneeze at, but when you’re the reason your school can afford that shiny new stadium, it feels a bit off, doesn’t it?

Now, I get the other side of the coin.

Some folks argue that throwing money into the mix could muddy the pure, educational spirit of college sports. They worry it might get messy figuring out who gets paid what, and that the focus might shift from hitting the books to hitting the bank. While there’s some truth there, it’s not like we’re suggesting we start handing out briefcases full of cash after each game.

The fact is, the landscape of college sports has changed. What used to be considered good, clean amateur fun now feels a lot like a full-time job for these athletes, minus the paycheck. They’re practicing like pros, playing like pros, and bringing in fans and money like pros. But unlike pros, most won’t ever sign a million-dollar contract. For many, this is as big as their sports career gets, and they’re risking injury and burnout for what?

It’s not about turning student-athletes into walking billboards or taking away from the essence of college sports. It’s about fairness. Maybe it’s a stipend system based on the revenue the sports bring in, or perhaps letting players make some coin off their name and face. Some states are already moving towards letting athletes profit off their own image, which is a step in the right direction.

Bottom line: the conversation around paying college athletes isn’t just a sports debate; it’s about doing right by these young talents. They’re the heart and soul of the games we love to watch, and it’s high time they got a fair piece of the pie. As the world of collegiate sports keeps evolving, so too should our appreciation—and compensation—of these athletes. Let’s make the play fair, both on and off the field.

Cite this page

Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid. (2024, Apr 01). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/

"Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid." PapersOwl.com , 1 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/ [Accessed: 13 Apr. 2024]

"Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid." PapersOwl.com, Apr 01, 2024. Accessed April 13, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/

"Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid," PapersOwl.com , 01-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/. [Accessed: 13-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Why It's High Time College Athletes Got Paid . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/why-its-high-time-college-athletes-got-paid/ [Accessed: 13-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

Home Essay Examples Education College

Paying College Athletes

• Category Education
• Subcategory Learning
• Topic College

Do you happen to know anyone that does not watch college athletics? College athletics has become one of the most popular sources of entertainment to spectators in America. For example, in 2017, the end of the season March Madness Tournament for Division one men’s basketball averaged 11.9 million viewers. In the United States, there are more than 460,000 Division one college athletes that compete in 24 different sports each year. The National Collegiate Athletic Association is the non-profit, member-led organization that regulates student athletes at 1,218 institutions and conferences across the United States. The amount of money this organization makes off of the student-athletes is unimaginable, yet all of those student-athletes will not see a single dime of it throughout their entire time at the school. Division I college athletes should be paid by the NCAA because of the amount of revenue, exposure, and the time and commitment they have put into their schools.

Political interaction regarding the paying of college athletes is beginning to develop. Senators across many states are being proactive and spreading the word as to why these athletes need to be receiving an income for their participation in their particular sport. There are a great deal of people backing up the proposed laws because it is very apparent that college athletes are putting all of their time into a sport while producing an income for the school that they attend but, not an income for themselves. One reason these outstanding athletes should be getting paid by the NCAA is because of the amount of hours they put into their season apart from their schoolwork. The athletes also promote their school and give a national spotlight to the college which causes an increase in applicants for the following year. Those students are not rewarded for their hard work as the school continues to benefit from the athlete’s successes.

Our writers can write you a new plagiarism-free essay on any topic

Corey Booker is a candidate for the 2020 presidential election and is promoting the payment of Division I athletes. He was an athlete at Stanford before taking his step into the political field. Booker understands the demand of being a student athlete and believes the young men and women need compensation for all of their hard work. He promotes this message by using a personal story regarding his injury that forced him to pay medical bills due to football. Yet, he was given no assistance financially and other people were profiting from using his name and his team in video games. He, as well as many others, believes this is unfair to young athletes that are trying to gain an education and succeed in their particular sport. Schools exploit their athletes and Cory Booker is attempting to make real change in order to regulate the NCAA and allow the student athletes to be taken care of financially.

Political figures are not the only people who are taking notice of the injustice to the athletes. Businessmen and women are brining light to the booming industry of collegiate sports. Athletes continue to bring in money for others in multiple industries, not only including their school, and are unable to bring in money for themselves. Coaches receive an income from the school while also obtaining endorsement deals from companies. This is unfair to the actual athletes who are underrepresented and not seeing one dollar that they have worked so hard to make for others. Division I sports affect every part of an athlete’s life and severely affect graduation rates. If the students were able to see a fraction of their profit it would likely increase the odds of athletes completing their four to five years in college. The NCAA is increasing in value every day by using workers that they do not have to pay which is unfair.

There are people that believe that athletes should not be paid because it is a part of the college experience and is simply an extracurricular activity for the students. Many of the athletes that play Division I sports have no intention of continuing to the professional league and simply chose to play their sport while in college because it makes them happy. These people believe the scholarships given to the athletes is enough of an incentive to play and represent their school. While these people have valid arguments the are completely undermining the extensive toll these competitive sports take on the athletes. These sports take time and energy out of an already demanding college lifestyle and athletes should be repaid for that lifestyle change. The amount of money their service is producing is massive and therefore the athletes should receive a piece from their work.

In the end, Division one college athletes should be paid by the NCAA because of the amount of revenue, exposure, and the time and commitment they have put into their schools. Ever since the National Collegiate Athletic Association was founded back in 1906, it has been taking advantage of outstanding top tier student athletes for their own profit. More and more people are realizing this as time progresses, because when you look into it and see how unfair this system the NCAA is running really is, it is not difficult to choose a side to this issue. In the past few years, video game creating companies stopped producing college sports games because of the controversy that came with them, this could be the first step toward getting the student athletes paid. Maybe one day the NCAA and the world will come up with a legal way to do it, sooner rather than later so that these young men and women that are overtaking the sports entertainment world can get a slice of the pie.

Works Cited

• Eitzen, D. Stanley. ‘College Athletes Should Be Paid.’ Sports and Athletes, edited by James D. Torr, Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010233247/OVIC?u=nysl_ca_beth&xid=7c1470ed. Accessed 8 Mar. 2018. Originally published as ‘Slaves of Big-Time College Sports,’ USA

We have 98 writers available online to start working on your essay just NOW!

Related Topics

Related essays.

By clicking "Send essay" you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

By clicking "Receive essay" you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

We can edit this one and make it plagiarism-free in no time

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Paying College Athletes — Paying College Athletes: Arguments for Fair Compensation

Paying College Athletes: Arguments for Fair Compensation

• Categories: College Tuition Paying College Athletes Student Athletes

About this sample

Words: 772 |

Published: Mar 18, 2021

Words: 772 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Education Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2125 words

2 pages / 711 words

3 pages / 1316 words

1 pages / 507 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Paying College Athletes

The question of whether coaches and players should receive equal compensation in the realm of professional sports is a topic that has sparked intense debate. The Should Coaches and Players Make the Same Amount of Money Essay [...]

In the past five to ten years, there has been a controversial question going around: should students who play a sport get paid as a reward of being a College Athlete? The answer is no. Student athletes should not get paid [...]

Should college athletes be paid? This essay argues that student athletes at universities around the country should not only obtain a percentage of income made off their athletic performance but also pursue business deals and [...]

The discussion whether the college athletes should be paid has been re-hashed several times. There are those who advocates in favor and many against the idea of paying athlete who plays sports for their colleges. Many reasons [...]

Imagine dedicating 20 hours a week to playing a sport in college while having to balance your schedule with school work with no financial gain. In high school, I played three sports and often found myself struggling to excel in [...]

On common on average only 1/3 of college athletes are given a scholarship and a majority are half as much as a full scholarships as stated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association. From that 1/3 about two percent make it [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Share full article

Advertisement

$500 signed

Branded vodka

“Buzzer beater”

The Many Ways Men’s Sweet 16 Players Are Being Paid

By David A. Fahrenthold and Billy Witz

This year’s N.C.A.A. basketball tournament is being played amid a revolutionary change in college sports: The best players are now openly recruited, retained and rewarded with cash.

That change began in 2021, when the N.C.A.A. — under pressure from the Justice Department and state legislatures — allowed players to be paid for the use of their “name, image and likeness.” The idea was to let players endorse shoes or sports drinks.

The new system was overrun by groups called “collectives” — made up of wealthy boosters who donated money, and in some cases raised even more, to pay athletes based on their value to the team. Now, there are hundreds of these groups, and big-time players can make salaries that, for a select few, can surpass $1 million.

Those big bucks and the loosening of transfer restrictions have turned the off-season into something like pro sports free agency — for male players, at least. (The average men’s basketball player with a collective contract at a top school is paid $63,450, according to Opendorse, a company that processes payments to players from collectives. The average women’s player gets $10,610.)

The N.C.A.A. tried to police this new system, then stopped last month after a federal judge said that N.C.A.A. rules likely violated antitrust laws . Every team in the men’s Sweet Sixteen has been touched by this change, which has brought windfalls to players but instability to the college game.

Select a Sweet 16 team to learn more about its collective(s).

The collective that supports the University of Connecticut’s teams, Bleeding Blue for Good, is the rare one that pays out more to men’s and women’s basketball players than it does to football players, according to its president, John Malfettone, who declined to disclose figures. A commercial for Bleeding Blue for Good, featuring UConn basketball players and encouraging donations, aired before the men’s tournament opener. Another way the collective raises money is by selling basketballs autographed by last year’s national championship men’s team — for $500 a pop. The collective pays players to teach at youth basketball camps and work with state charities.

Above: A basketball signed by UConn players

San Diego State

Guard Lamont Butler hit a last-second shot to win the national semifinal game last year. This year, Butler is still in college — and making money off that shot. San Diego State’s collective sells framed photos for $555 — Butler wears No. 5 — and a San Diego restaurant pays Butler to endorse its new “Buzzer Beater” quesadilla.

Above: Lamont Butler next to the “Buzzer Beater” quesadilla

Illinois’ ICON Collective is a nonprofit, which says it gives 90 percent of donations to athletes for performing charity work. The I.R.S. has recently raised questions about that model, saying that collectives that pay most of their money to athletes may not be charitable enough. The I.R.S. has said it will audit some collectives to determine if they still merit tax exemption.

Trying to diversify its income stream beyond wealthy donors, Iowa State’s We Will Collective now raises money to pay athletes by selling branded beer, vodka and We Will Gluten-Free Meat Lovers pizza.

Above: Iowa State-branded beverages

North Carolina

The N.C.A.A. is now seeking to loosen its rules about schools working with N.I.L. collectives, and U.N.C. is already moving toward centralizing three now-independent collectives and taking a tighter grip on them.

The University of Alabama’s collective, which has both a for-profit and a nonprofit side, releases few details about its activity. Last year, Elliot Maisel, a board member of the nonprofit, told The New York Times that its spending was entirely dictated by the school’s athletic department — despite N.C.A.A. rules that barred schools from securing payments for players. Days later, Mr. Maisel reversed himself, saying he did not know how his group spent its money after all.

Above: Alabama guard Mark Sears

Clemson University used to have a large nonprofit collective, but it closed down after the I.R.S. said paying athletes should not count as charity — a warning many collectives have seemed to ignore. Now, Clemson’s main collective is a for-profit organization run by a former university employee.

Like most everything in college sports, N.I.L. collectives are dominated by football. At the University of Texas, about 70 percent of all N.I.L. payments have gone to football players, according to statistics provided by the school. Arizona, though, has sports-specific collectives. Arizona Assists gets money to men’s basketball players. Joining as a Corporate Cat requires yearly contributions of more than $10,000.

The University of Houston’s collective, LinkingCoogs, signed a $350,000 deal for the basketball team to endorse a Houston personal-injury lawyer, according to the news site on3.com . They could have used an advocate on Sunday, when four players fouled out in an overtime win over Texas A&M.

Houston players endorsed a personal injury lawyer on Instagram in March.

In 2022, Duke’s basketball team was among the first to hire a dedicated “general manager” to help players seek out N.I.L. income. Before this general manager gig, Rachel Baker worked at Nike, building the brands of professional athletes like Kevin Durant.

What kind of perks do donors to these collectives get? At N.C. State, the Savage Wolves collective sent an athlete to cheer on one of its donors’ sons during the son’s lacrosse tryout. “This kid was looking at him like he was Superman,” said Tom Livolsi, who runs the collective.

Marquette University coach Shaka Smart focuses on an unusual statistic: deflections, meaning times that one of his players tips or redirects an opponent’s shot or pass. Marquette’s Be the Difference collective has now asked fans to donate money for each deflection during the tournament. Smart tells players he wants 32 deflections per game, so those pledges could add up.

Above: Marquette University coach Shaka Smart

N.I.L. payments to international players are bound by strict limits on their ability to work in the United States. But Zach Edey, the team’s star Canadian center, has still benefited from what are considered “passive” endorsements, which are allowed. Mike Bobinski, the school’s athletic director, said in an interview last year that Edey made money off of his photo on soda cups sold in the team arena’s concession stands, as well as merchandise in stores on campus. Purdue’s collective, the Boilermaker Alliance, has also lined up agreements with three Canadian charities. Altogether, Edey’s N.I.L. compensation is believed to come close to or match what he could have made on a professional contract had he left the school after last season.

Gonzaga’s collective is run by the B.P.S. Foundation, a tax-exempt charity that puts donor money at the disposal of for-profit collectives, letting the for-profit entities determine how money is given out. (Arizona also has a collective run by the B.P.S. Foundation.) Tax experts have said nonprofits should operate independently. But the approach is working: The B.P.S. Foundation saw revenue climb to $14 million in 2023 from $3.4 million in 2022.

B.P.S. Foundation annual revenue

$14 million

$3.4 million

Creighton’s business school offers athletes an N.I.L. seminar, with topics like how to file their income taxes and how to build a personal brand. Players also get paid by The Bird Club, its men’s basketball collective, for events with kids. Last year, one of them included a dunk tank where kids got to dunk their favorite players.

The University of Tennessee’s collective, the Volunteer Club, was under investigation by the N.C.A.A. for flying a quarterback prospect who agreed to an $8 million N.I.L. deal to Knoxville on a private plane. But Tennessee’s attorney general sued to stop the investigation, and a federal judge ruled that the N.C.A.A. could not stop collectives from offering cash to attract recruits.

Produced by Charlie Smart . Noah Weiland contributed reporting. Photos by Denis Poroy/Associated Press, Young Kwak/Associated Press, Michael Conroy/Associated Press.

Inside the World of Sports

Dive deeper into the people, issues and trends shaping professional, collegiate and amateur athletics..

Minor League Baseball’s Real Estate: The fight over a new stadium for the Eugene Emeralds  highlights a wider challenge for cheaper alternatives to big-league live sports.

New York’s Favorite Soccer Team: Some people splurge on vacations, fancy shoes and motorcycles. A group of dozens of friends, neighbors and co-workers decided to try something better (or maybe worse): They bought a middling soccer team in Denmark .

Here Comes Padel: The sport is played with a racket on a court with a net, but watch out for those bouncing shots from the back wall. Reporters take a look at the padel scene in New York City .

Have the Brands Gone Too Far?: Runners at the Boston Marathon are disappointed that the new finisher medals feature a large bank logo  across the bottom.

How Soccer Embraced Ramadan: In competitions like the Premier League, Muslim pros who once faced pressure to avoid daily fasts  during the monthlong holiday now benefit from custom diets and in-game breaks.

Should College Athletes Be Paid? Essay Example, with Outline

Published by gudwriter on November 23, 2017 November 23, 2017

Here is an essay example on whether college athletes should be paid or not. We explore the pros and cons and conclude that college students have a right to be paid.

Elevate Your Writing with Our Free Writing Tools!

Did you know that we provide a free essay and speech generator, plagiarism checker, summarizer, paraphraser, and other writing tools for free?

If you find yourself struggling to complete your essay, don’t panic. We can help you complete your paper before the deadline through our homework help history . We help all students across the world excel in their academics.

Should College Athletes Be Paid Essay Outline

Introduction.

Thesis: College students should be paid given the nature and organization of college athletics.

Reasons Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

Paragraph 1:

Since college athletics programs are geared towards turning a profit at the end in terms of the revenue generated during the programs, it would only be fair to pay the athletes involved.

• Some of the revenues should be passed to the people who actually cause the fans to come to the pitch, the players.
• The NCCA should consider passing regulations that control the compensation made to coaches so that they do not get paid salaries that are unnecessarily high.

Paragraph 2:

Paying college athletes would also limit or even end corruption from such external influences as agents and boosters.

• Bribing players kills the spirit of whatever game they are involved because they would be playing to the tune of the bribe they receive.
• If they cannot get well compensated by their respective parent institutions, a player would be easily lured into corruption.

Paragraph 3:

Student athletes are subjected to huge workloads that only make it fair that they get paid.

• They are required to regularly attend physical therapy, weight trainings, team meetings, film sessions, and practice for the various sports they take part in.
• They are still required to attend all classes without fail and always post good grades

Reasons Why College Athletes Should Not Be Paid

Paragraph 4:

Paying college athletes would remove their competitive nature and the passion they have for the games they participate in.

• It would culminate into a situation where the only motive the athletes have for playing is money and not the sportsman drive of winning games and trophies.
• The hunger and passion usually shown in college sports would be traded for “lackadaisical plays and half-ass efforts that we sometime see from pros.”

Paragraph 5:

Paying college athletes would also lead to the erosion of the connection between athlete students and college values.

• College sports would be effectively reduced to a market where students who are yet to join college and are talented in sports are won over by the highest bidding institution.
• A student would join a college not for its values in academics and social values but because it offers the best compensation perks in sports.

Intercollegiate athletic competitions continue to grow and gain more prominence in the US. The NCAA and the institutions of higher learning involved continue to make high profits from college athletic programs. College athletes deserve being paid because without them, college sports would not be existent.  

Crucial question to explore; describe how you have taken advantage of a significant educational opportunity .

Essay on “Should College Athletes Be Paid?”

College athletics is a prominent phenomenon in the United States of America and is controlled and regulated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The Association is non-profit and is in charge of organizing the athletic programs of many higher learning institutions including universities and colleges. From the programs, the Association reaps significant revenues which it distributes to the institutions involved in spite of it being a non-profit organization. Noteworthy, the participants in the athletic programs from which the revenues are accrued are college students. This scenario has led to the emergence of the question of whether or not college students deserve being paid for their participation. This paper argues that college athletes should be paid given the nature and organization of college athletics.

Since college athletics programs are geared towards turning a profit at the end in terms of the revenue generated during the programs, it would only be fair to pay the athletes involved. “A report by  CNN’s Chris Isidore  in March 2015 named the Louisville Cardinals as the NCAA’s most profitable college basketball team for the 2013-14 season…” (Benjamin, 2017). Additionally, the programs have attracted huge coaching salaries which continue rising, with a basketball coach getting as high as $7.1 million in salaries. So, would it not be prudent to pass some of these revenues to the people who actually cause the fans to come to the pitch, the players? The NCCA should consider passing regulations that control the compensation made to coaches so that they do not get paid salaries that are unnecessarily high. This would allow for some part of the revenue to be channeled to compensating the players and give more meaning to collegiate athletics.

Paying college athletes would also limit or even end corruption from such external influences as agents and boosters. “Over the years we have seen and heard scandals involving players taking money and even point-shaving” (Lemmons, 2017). Bribing players kills the spirit of whatever game they are involved in because they would be playing to the tune of the bribe they would have received. But again, if they cannot get well compensated by their respective parent institutions, a player would be easily lured into corruption. It should be noted that since it is some sort of business, an institution would do all within its reach to enable its college sports team(s) win matches and even trophies, including bribing players of opponent teams. The most effective way of curbing this practice is to entitle every player to a substantial compensation amount for their services to college athletics teams.

Perhaps you maybe interested in understanding some of the mistakes to avoid when crafting an MBA essay .

Further, student athletes are subjected to huge workloads that only make it fair that they get paid. They are required to regularly attend physical therapy, weight trainings, team meetings, film sessions, and practice for the various sports they take part in. On top of all that, they are still required to attend all classes without fail and always post good grades (Thacker, 2017). Is this not too much to ask for from somebody who gets nothing in terms of monetary compensation? Take a situation whereby an athlete gets out of practice at about 7 pm and has got a sit-in paper to take the following day. He or she is expected to study just as hard as every other student in spite of being understandably tired from the practice. It beats logic how a student in such a tight situation is expected to get all their work successfully done. It becomes even less sensible when it is considered that these students still have a social life to make time for (Thacker, 2017). Being paid for this hectic schedule may give them the motivation they need to keep going each day despite the toll the schedule takes on them.

Paying college athletes would remove their competitive nature and the passion they have for the games they participate in. It would culminate into a situation where the only motive the athletes have for playing is money and not the sportsman drive of winning games and trophies. As noted by Lemmons (2017), the hunger and passion usually shown in college sports would be traded for “lackadaisical plays and half-ass efforts that we sometime see from pros.” College sports would morph into full blown business ventures whereby the athletes are like employees and the colleges the employers. Participation in a sport would become more important for students than the actual contribution their participation makes to the sport. Moreover, students would want to take part not in sports in which they are richly talented but in sports that can guarantee better payment.

Paying college athletes would also lead to the erosion of the connection between athlete students and college values. “If a high-school football prodigy reported that he chose Michigan not for its academic quality, tradition, or beautiful campus but because it outbid all other suitors, a connection to the university’s values would be lost” (Yankah, 2015). College sports would be effectively reduced to a market where students who are yet to join college and are talented in sports are won over by the highest bidding institution. The implication is that a student would join a college not for its values in academics and social values but because it offers the best compensation perks in sports. It is clear here that the connection would purely be pegged on sports and payment. This will also turn colleges from grounds of molding future professionals to sports ventures.

Intercollegiate athletic competitions continue to grow and gain more prominence in the US. The NCAA and the institutions of higher learning involved continue to make high profits from college athletic programs. There are even coaches whose salaries for offering their services to college sports teams run into millions of dollars. Yet, those who work so hard so that this revenue can be realized are sidelined when it comes to payment. College athletes deserve being paid because without them, college sports would not be existent. It is thus less logical to continue engaging them while they do not enjoy the proceeds from their work.

Benjamin, J. (2017). “ Is it time to start paying college athletes? Tubby Smith and Gary Williams weigh in” . Forbes . Retrieved 21 November 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbenjamin/2017/04/04/is-it-time-to-start-paying-college-athletes/#72b48b3af71f

Lemmons, M. (2017). “ College athletes getting paid? Here are some pros and cons” . HuffPost . Retrieved 21 November 2017, from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/college-athletes-getting-paid-here-are-some-pros-cons_us_58cfcee0e4b07112b6472f9a

Thacker, D. (2017). Amateurism vs. capitalism: a practical approach to paying college athletes.  Seattle Journal for Social Justice , 16(1), 183-216.

Yankah, E. (2015). “ Why N.C.A.A. athletes shouldn’t be paid” . The New Yorker . Retrieved 21 November 2017, from https://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/why-ncaa-athletes-shouldnt-be-paid

Special offer! Get 20% discount on your first order. Promo code: SAVE20

Related Posts

Free essays and research papers, artificial intelligence argumentative essay – with outline.

Artificial Intelligence Argumentative Essay Outline In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become one of the rapidly developing fields and as its capabilities continue to expand, its potential impact on society has become a topic Read more…

Synthesis Essay Example – With Outline

The goal of a synthesis paper is to show that you can handle in-depth research, dissect complex ideas, and present the arguments. Most college or university students have a hard time writing a synthesis essay, Read more…

Examples of Spatial Order – With Outline

A spatial order is an organizational style that helps in the presentation of ideas or things as is in their locations. Most students struggle to understand the meaning of spatial order in writing and have Read more…

The Logical End Point of College Sports

If players are workers, schools will have to pay them.

Cade Haskins averaged just 0.9 points a game this season for one of the worst teams in all of Division I college basketball. And yet he may turn out to be responsible for triggering one of the biggest changes in the sport’s history.

Last month, in a small HR office above the only sports bar in Hanover, New Hampshire, Haskins and his teammates on the Dartmouth College basketball squad voted to form the first-ever NCAA players’ union. Their goal: to collectively bargain with the school for wages in exchange for playing basketball. Dartmouth had six wins and 21 losses this year, good enough for dead last in the Ivy League—itself not nationally competitive—and 334th out of 362 Division I basketball teams. No player on the current roster was alive the last time Dartmouth had a winning season, and the program hasn’t qualified for the March Madness tournament since 1959. The vote nonetheless drew reporters from national publications, including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal , because of its potential to disrupt NCAA athletics.

College sports generate billions of dollars in annual revenue, but the players putting on the show currently get nothing from that pot of money—even after a recent change allowing athletes to monetize their name, image, and likeness. They rely instead on advertisers, rich donors, and the pooled funds of loyal fans, who are themselves growing fatigued with propping it all up. The Dartmouth players’ union threatens to change that structure, opening the door for universities to pay college athletes directly. Some athletes could be in line for a huge windfall; the top college-athletic departments generate more in sports revenue than some NHL teams. If Duke men’s basketball players, for example, got the 50 percent share of revenue common in professional sports, they’d be in line for $1.5 million each, per year.

If schools are going to compensate players directly, the NCAA would like to control how . The Dartmouth basketball players have put that future in doubt, replacing it with one where revenue-generating athletes sit across the table from schools, negotiating their cut just like professionals.

Historically, even the greatest college athletes made no money at all. They might receive cash or gifts under the table, but in doing so they ran the risk of harsh punishment, no matter the size of the gift. In 2010, much of the Ohio State football team was suspended for nearly half a season for selling memorabilia in exchange for small amounts of cash ( about $1,000 ) and discounted tattoos. That same season, the program generated roughly $52 million, of which the players got $0.

The situation has changed radically, however, over the past five years. In 2019, California fired the first big shot, passing the Fair Pay to Play Act, allowing players to earn money from the use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL), as they would in endorsement deals. The law was set to take effect in 2023, but it never needed to, thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in NCAA v. Alston . In that case, the Court unanimously ruled that the NCAA was violating antitrust law through strict rules governing the circumstances in which players could be compensated (scholarships, but not internships; books, but not computers). According to the decision, by agreeing to not offer various benefits, universities were effectively conspiring to suppress the compensation of college athletes, rather than competing to attract those athletes. (The ruling described the arrangement as “horizontal price fixing in a market where the defendants exercise monopoly control.”) Nine days after the ruling came out, the NCAA announced that it would allow players to make NIL deals regardless of whether they lived in a state that had passed a version of California’s law.

Since then, NIL has become a billion-dollar industry , with some players receiving big payouts in exchange for Nike shoe deals, Pringles ads on Instagram, and Google commercials on TV. These endorsements make up only a small fraction of NIL spending, most of which is done by “collectives” of alumni and fans who pool their money to recruit and retain top athletes, nominally as compensation for using the players’ name, image, and likeness at, for example, a charity fundraiser. One such collective, formed by University of Texas football fans in 2021, announced it would pay offensive linemen at Texas $50,000 a year in an initiative it called “The Pancake Factory,” named for when an offensive lineman blocks a defender so hard that they’re flattened like a pancake.

Lora Kelley: The big money of college basketball

Dartmouth players don’t get lucrative NIL deals. Like all Ivy League athletes, they don’t even get scholarships for being athletes. (They can, however, get need-based financial aid like any other Dartmouth student.) According to the college, the basketball team loses money for the school. And the players are aware that they aren’t part of an economic juggernaut. They aren’t demanding a piece of some billion-dollar pie that doesn’t exist. As they told me and other journalists, they mostly just want the $16.25-an-hour minimum wage paid to all student employees, including their own student managers. Basketball, they argue, is their campus job.

According to Laura Sacks, the regional director of the National Labor Relations Board who oversees much of New England, the basketball players are employees. As she put it in her ruling allowing the unionization vote to proceed, the players perform “work in exchange for compensation,” rendering them employees by definition—even if the team, like any number of businesses, loses money overall. “The profitability of any given business does not affect the employee status of the individuals who perform work for that business,” Sacks wrote.

The work is lifting weights, playing basketball, occasionally skipping class, traveling many weekends, schmoozing with alumni who might donate, and even avoiding taking classes in common periods that might conflict with practice. The compensation is expensive shoes, branded parkas, access to an athletes-only gym, regular free meals, a laundry service for their jerseys. Then there’s the greatest prize of all: access to what Sacks described as “highly coveted admission spots” for recruited players, which, for less academically qualified athletes, translates to a dramatically better chance of getting accepted into an Ivy League school in the first place. (I graduated from Dartmouth last year, but didn’t personally know any of the basketball players—perhaps because they were always doing basketball things.)

Dartmouth disagrees with the characterization of the players as employees, and its legal team, which includes the former chair of the NLRB under Donald Trump, is appealing Sacks’s decision. According to Dartmouth, athletes are just like any other student. If the basketball players are employees, the school argues, then “it would be impossible to distinguish these student-athlete-‘employees’ from other students at Dartmouth or any other university or college (or even those in high school) that are engaged in extracurricular activities that require their time, talents, skills, and efforts, and for which they receive no monetary compensation but do receive university or activity branded apparel.”

Read: What happened to baseball jerseys?

Now is probably not a great time for Dartmouth to be arguing that players aren’t workers. A small group of legal scholars have insisted for decades that the NCAA is an illegal cartel in which universities get together in private and set the terms upon which they recruit, retain, and compensate talent, without the talent present at the table. The Alston ruling, by holding that the NCAA wasn’t immune from antitrust law, opened the door to a flood of lawsuits testing that theory. In February, a federal judge in Tennessee issued a preliminary injunction against the NCAA enforcing any rules surrounding NIL, which led the NCAA to announce that it would stop doing so. Meanwhile, a coalition of seven states is suing the NCAA over its rule requiring athletes who switch schools multiple times to sit out for a season before playing for their new team. The judge in that case has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the transfer policy from being enforced.

The NCAA has signaled its openness to direct compensation of players, clinging to its right to make the rules even as that power gets stripped by the courts. The NCAA president, former Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, recently proposed a new subdivision of Division I schools that would pay at least $30,000 a year per eligible athlete into an “educational trust fund.” Schools would still have to vote on such a proposal, and it could take years to implement. But the NLRB ruling recognizing the Dartmouth union, if it holds up on appeal (along with a related NLRB complaint against the University of Southern California ), is poised to render these sorts of schemes moot. If players are employees, they must be paid—not through trust funds or NIL collectives, but rather actual wages or salaries from their employer, the university. As the sports-antitrust-law professor Marc Edelman, who has studied this issue for years, told me, if the players are “deemed to be employees, Dartmouth has to give [at least] the minimum wage. That’s not even something that would be bargained for.”

The days of the NCAA unilaterally decreeing the terms of athletes’ compensation appear to be numbered. So what comes next? The sports- and entertainment-law professor Michael McCann has observed that any school could just go ahead and start paying players now, giving itself a competitive advantage and daring the NCAA to try and stop it, knowing that the courts would likely rule on the school’s side if push came to shove.

Alternatively, athletic conferences could bargain with players. This is what union leaders at Dartmouth envision. In February, Cade Haskins and his teammate Romeo Myrthil announced that they would form an Ivy League Players Association to advocate for the interests of all Ivy League athletes. Haskins told me that players in the top basketball conferences have reached out to him to see how the unionization effort has gone, perhaps a sign that players in bigger, better programs would be interested in this outcome as well.

Or perhaps college sports will end up looking a lot more like the professional-sports landscape. In the major pro leagues, a players’ union negotiates with owners on compensation rules such as a minimum salary and the share of overall revenue set aside for the players. This might be the most attractive option for college sports, because it doesn’t put at risk the type of inter-conference tournaments that fans crave, like March Madness.

The difference between college and the pros is that, unlike in big-time professional leagues, most college athletic programs report spending more money than they bring in. If they suddenly have to start sharing revenue with the athletes, that might force some tough choices. Money-losing programs might have to accept going deeper in the red; profitable ones might see their margins shrink. Or they could come up with the money by cutting other costs, such as coaches’ salaries. But some schools will probably eliminate certain sports programs entirely—or replace them with versions that look more like optional extracurriculars and less like student jobs.

At Dartmouth, for example, if the basketball players are employees, so too are the squash players, rowers, and field-hockey players. With its $8 billion endowment, Dartmouth can probably afford to pay them all minimum wages. But it might prefer to get out of the niche-sports business altogether. If the unionization of the Dartmouth men’s basketball team leads to a future in which star college athletes are fairly compensated but, in return, already privileged applicants no longer receive easy admissions or scholarships in exchange for playing an obscure sport few people care to watch, that might not be such a bad outcome. (Revenue-sharing could be even more costly for colleges if the courts interpret Title IX as requiring strictly equal payment for men and women. Dartmouth argues that paying the men’s team “could raise compliance questions under Title IX.” The union disagrees, pointing out that Title IX does not require equal pay for athletic-department employees , such as coaches; according to the union, of course, players are employees too.)

Saahil Desai: College sports are affirmative action for rich white students

Haskins and his teammates did not set out to change college sports. According to Haskins, he and his teammates in the junior class came up with the idea of unionizing after seeing the student-dining employees unionize, and the resulting rise in wages not just among the dining workers but among all student workers on campus.

The players are hoping the unionization effort follows a similar pattern: benefiting first them, then the rest of the Ivy League, then all college players. “It’s definitely not about bringing down the whole NCAA,” Haskins told me. “It’s more about change for the next generation of athletes.”

Support for this project was provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

Student-athletes are inking lucrative endorsement deals, but a patchwork of laws has created chaos in college sports

College basketball stars such as Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese have captivated sports fans everywhere with their skill and determination, but their meteoric rise is also shining a spotlight on the NCAA’s name, image and likeness policy that allows student-athletes to make money from their personal brand.

Ever since a landmark decision by the Supreme Court in 2021 paved the way for athletes to monetize their brand and pursue “education-related benefits,” the federal government has done nothing to provide structure or guardrails for how that would work.

Some 30 states have passed their own name, image and likeness (NIL) laws, while a series of court decisions have raised questions about what universities can and cannot do in the recruitment process.

The resulting vacuum has been filled by “collectives,” or third-party organizations formed by deep-pocketed donors and school supporters who can pool money and offer NIL deals to athletes — in some cases effectively creating a bidding war.

The chaos that’s ensued has rankled the likes of Alabama football coach Nick Saban, who voiced his support for traditional NIL opportunities but railed against this “pay for play” model at a congressional roundtable last month.

“I don’t think that’s the spirit of college athletics,” Saban told the panel, which was hosted by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. “I don’t think that’s ever been what we want the spirit of college athletics to be.”

Since the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in NCAA v. Alston, many student-athletes have seized on lucrative opportunities that use their name, image or likeness. Iowa’s Clark has inked deals with State Farm, Nike and Gatorade, among others. But despite the intense spotlight for the biggest names, the reality is there are approximately half a million athletes competing under the NCAA and tens of thousands who stand to benefit from making connections and earning money from their NIL rights.

For Bailey Ortega, a fifth-year volleyball player at Louisiana State University who transferred from Iowa this year, it’s about developing relationships, cultivating a brand and seeing where that takes her.

“For me, it was a good opportunity to find different avenues outside of my sport and use my passions,” Bailey told NBC News on campus recently after a spring practice. She said one of the first things she created after the Supreme Court’s ruling was her own line of merchandise, with some of the proceeds going to University of Iowa Children’s Hospital.

Since then, Ortega has signed a deal with software company Hudl and led conversations about athlete empowerment at events like ESPNW Campus Conversations.

But the   patchwork of state laws — and the absence of any federal legislation — has led to lawsuits challenging the NCAA’s ability to crack down on certain recruitment practices and made business dealings at the college level much more confusing.

Recently, a federal judge dealt a massive blow to the NCAA and its attempts to investigate several schools after the Tennessee and Virginia attorneys general sued the organization.

“Everyone’s finally taking this situation very seriously,” said Darren Heitner, a sports lawyer who teaches at several universities and represents high-profile athletes at both the collegiate and professional levels, including college basketball stars Haley and Hanna Cavinder and the Golden State Warriors’ Draymond Green.

“Coaches, athletic directors, conference commissioners — they’re all panicking because they’re afraid of the unknown,” Heitner said. “They don’t know whether the system is sustainable.”

But Heitner, who was at the roundtable, pushed back on Saban’s argument that “whoever wants to pay the most money, raise the most money, buy the most players is going to have the best opportunity to win.” Collectives, Heitner says, offer “inducements” tied to enrollment at a particular college and perhaps social media responsibilities or other deliverables, but not performance on the field.

These collectives and NIL opportunities give athletes more power over the NCAA, conferences and colleges, and Heitner thinks this is why some prominent industry figures are so riled up.

“It’s driving coaches who have been in the business for decades absolutely nuts because they understood the secret sauce, they built the formulas that withstood the test of time,” Heitner said. “And then all of a sudden … everything changed.”

As members of Congress from both chambers and parties have introduced legislation — from creating a partial “antitrust exemption” for the NCAA, to a revenue-sharing structure to pay players, to special rules for the highest-performing programs — there’s been no real movement on Capitol Hill, and the clock’s ticking.

Stuck in the middle are the universities such as LSU trying to guide students in the right direction and maximize their opportunities.

Following the Supreme Court decision, the school formed its own NIL office headed by Taylor Jacobs, a former athlete who spent years working in NCAA compliance.

Jacobs says she’s been amazed by what athletes have been able to accomplish through NIL, from helping to subsidize the education of their siblings to setting up a fund to help other female student-athletes.

“At the end of the day, it’s our student-athletes who are putting LSU on the map and helping create this LSU brand, and they are capitalizing on it,” Jacobs said.

Sam Brock is an NBC News correspondent.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

How Marketers Choose College Athlete Influencers

• Kimberly A. Whitler
• Graham Twente

The authors’ research findings: Athletes’ image and quality of social media posts are more important than their follower counts, posts should feature sports more than personal content, and sexy imagery should be avoided.

Here are the characteristics that matter most.

Since 2021 McDonald’s, Microsoft, PepsiCo, Berkshire Hathaway, Amazon, Unilever, and other leading companies have done something that was never before possible: They have paid U.S. college athletes to act as product endorsers and influencers. Until a Supreme Court ruling that year, paying college athletes was forbidden under the rules of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). In the aftermath of the Court’s ruling, the NCAA adopted a policy that enabled more than 520,000 student athletes to monetize their names, images, and likenesses by signing what have become known as NIL deals. Although no definitive count exists of athletes who have signed such deals, 278 students (40% of varsity athletes) at Texas Tech had been sponsored as of 2022. In just a few years marketers have already spent more than $1 billion on such endorsements. For individual athletes these deals can be lucrative. Consider Paige Bueckers, a University of Connecticut basketball player, whom Gatorade chose as its first sponsored college athlete. Bueckers is expected to earn more than $1 million while playing college basketball.

Over the past 20 years the social media influencer industry has completely rearranged the way information and culture are conceived, produced, marketed, and shared. This month’s Spotlight package looks at how brands are responding.

• Kimberly A. Whitler is the Frank M. Sands Sr. Associate Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business and a coauthor of Athlete Brands: How to Benefit from Your Name, Image & Likeness .
• GT Graham Twente is a former senior research manager at the Darden School of Business and currently a member of the data and analytics technology consulting staff at EY in Washington, DC.

Partner Center