REPORTS of schools breaching National Collegiate Athletic Association rules have become quite commonplace. These infringements almost always occur in college football and basketball, the two most profitable college sports. Most commonly, the violations take place when schools are found to have either given improper benefits directly to their players or to have not disclosed the fact that boosters and other outside donors awarded improper benefits to their players.
The stunning number of recent rules violations in college sports has led many writers and analysts to declare that undergraduate athletes should just be paid. The NCAA currently outlaws this. Although having universities directly pay their players is not the right decision, there nevertheless should be rule changes that allow some players to receive well-deserved financial compensation from non-school sources.
Proponents of directly paying college athletes cite the fact that college football and basketball players help to generate large amounts of revenue for their schools. To be sure, these two college sports have evolved into huge businesses where the most financially successful programs rake in massive profits. Texas, for example, reported profits of nearly $69 million for its 2009-2010 football season. Louisville earned almost $17 million from its basketball program that same year.
The athletes themselves greatly contribute to the generating of these large profits. Historically, great football and basketball schools have owed much of their brand images to their athletes. Thus, it seems unfair that the players do not get a share of the profits they helped generate.
To have a school directly pay its players, however, is still excessive, especially when one considers all that college athletes currently receive from schools. Improper or future monetary benefits aside, the best college athletes essentially do get paid. Those who are on scholarship receive a free education. If the athlete normally would pay out-of-state tuition to attend college, that could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars of compensation. And it should not be forgotten that the ultimate goal of higher education is to provide an education. Any athlete on scholarship, therefore, is receiving something of great value to which many people never have access.
Moreover, college athletes do not have to pay for their uniforms, gear, flights or any other expense that is associated with their being on the team. They have access to the best training facilities and staff. Food, books, tutoring and housing all can be provided free of charge by their schools. Furthermore, athletes receive many random perks for participating in various games or tournaments. Basketball players at the University, for instance, receive complimentary gifts for their participation in the Maui Invitational tournament.
Current regulations also prohibit undergraduate athletes from receiving money in forms other than their scholarships. This includes any business or endorsement deals involving the athletes. This is where the NCAA needs to reevaluate its rules. Income to athletes provided by institutions or individuals outside of the athlete's school should be allowed. Athletes should not be forced to abide by different rules than other college students who produce goods or services that may earn them financial compensation. Amateur musicians or artists are free to earn money from their crafts - why should athletes be treated differently?
The truth of the matter is that college athletes are still normal college students. True, their status as athletes may give them more celebrity status than the ordinary college student. Nevertheless, this does not give schools the right to bar their athletes from seeking external compensation for their work. The selling of autographs and personal items by athletes should be permitted. An athlete should be free to receive a share of the revenue generated by the sale of his jersey. If a college is to earn money selling items related to its athletes, it only makes sense that the athletes themselves should be allowed to earn a portion of the profits.
The band members of Radiohead and Coldplay started playing gigs together in college. Emma Watson is returning to Brown University amid the continued success of the Harry Potter films. Yet nobody would view any outside funding of these people to be wrong. Only college athletes are at risk of being punished unfairly for receiving monetary benefits from out-of-school admirers.
Alex Yahanda's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at a.yahanda@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 5 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
